Why Not Again?

There is a house in Thiruvanmaiyur along the beach road where I usually take my morning constitutional – a big house of indeterminate color, with all kinds of frills, picture windows and Rapunzel towers; one, that stands out and would catch the eye of sidewalk artists and movie audiences – that seems mostly abandoned. The yard is choked with weeds and refuse; neighbors heaving their trash over the wall. It is said to be used occasionally for photo shoots for some of the oodles of movies the highly successful Tamil film industry cranks out on a daily basis.

One time I was out there early morning, watching the fishermen unloading their catches and I noticed a helicopter hovering over that particular place. I didn’t think too much about it at the time; but lately, I’ve been thinking that it could also very well function as India’s version of our witness protection program or as a safe house for Tamil Tiger plotters. Hide in plain sight. Why not make the lie so big, so obvious, that no one will question it?

Mockery is one of the most potent weapons in the human arsenal. It has always been so. Christ on the cross was said to have been mocked. Obviously, Bush was mocked constantly. Since Obama’s election, mockery has been pretty much off the table as the president has shown himself to be far more adept in the art (of mockery) than any of his critics.

Besides, it’s in bad form to mock a black man. One might be accused of racism. Though, this too might be dependent on other factors as we are discovering that black or white may not be the issue at all. Justice Thomas, for instance, might be mocked and no one will say much about it. It’s only Obama that cannot be mocked. What’s the difference? Both men – last time I looked – are black. Here we come to the nub or it: only certain black men can be mocked while others can’t. The modifier that explains all this appears to be ‘conservative’.

Note how liberals strut around, routinely mocking tea parties, Republican lawmakers and presidents, popular talk show hosts and commentators, second amendment supporters, presidential aspirants, religious leaders and their congregations, etc. Make no mistake, these are attacks and they do damage.

You might say that Limbaugh (and some others) mocks the Left. The difference is that Limbaugh gives reasons for his mockery. The Left gives no reasons. Ordinarily, the press would step in to mediate. But, we all know that the media tilts the playing field to favor the Left. Limbaugh’s words and audience are routinely treated as if they do not exist. Instead, people like the girls on ‘The View’ are given star headline treatment.

The day after Osama’s killing, Limbaugh went on air and mocked Obama. There it was! The Left was outraged (if they said anything). What was supposed to be America’s proudest moment since the start of the war on terror, was being mocked unabashedly. Other talk show hosts, known for being critical of the president, refrained from doing so. Not Limbaugh!

Maybe it’s just me, but I too found the whole deal somewhat hollow. For me personally, it did not seem to rise to the status of a significant event. And any attempt to see it as such seemed somehow contrived and cheap, and quite worthy of mockery – an ‘emperor has no clothes’ moment, if you wish. A proper trial would have sat well and settled it. The subtext is, of course, that we can no longer expect a proper trial in this country. Obama has taken that from us as well.

It should have been a moment of quiet restraint and reflection. It needed to be handled with much greater fineness than simply dumping a corpse into the drink. Mike had it right, I think: ‘Defeat snatched out of the jaws of victory’, he wrote. Neither does it impress that al-Qaeda confirmed the kill publicly. I seem to remember AQ websites being largely supportive of Obama winning the election in 2008. They got their wish. Why not again?

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Detroit: Downsizing America

Liberals as well as conservatives are dumbfounded, taken off guard, outraged by president Obama’s handling of the Libyan situation; committing American troops into a theater of ‘kinetic military action’ without clear goals defining ‘victory’; without formally addressing the U.S. Congress or the American people. This means that this president must be intending to go it alone, much like Syrian president Assad is apt to do - or Kaddafi, for that matter.

Obama keeps hinting that this operation will be short and sweet after which time we’ll be out of there and wash our hands of the killing. History shows, however, that this sort of thing has a habit of dragging on. I listened to Dan Henninger last night. He’s one of my favorites on the WSJ editorial staff, but even he had it wrong. He views the conflict as ‘something’ sweeping the Middle East; something so powerful, it cannot be stopped or its direction determined. I do not believe in some amorphous ‘something’. Unleashed? Yes, the way someone might unleash an attack dog. Directionless? No. We all know where it’s headed, but are afraid to say it out loud.

America is not America without also being a super power. Yet, we can plainly see that it is this administration’s intention to degrade us to some unspecified common denominator. I don’t remember the president campaigning on a platform to make America worse. We all fell for the ‘change’ routine while assuming that ‘change’ meant ‘better than Bush’.

This sentiment is not exactly new. Liberals have in the past often promoted the banning of SUV’s on the premise that SUV’s are dangerous to smaller cars. It would seem that, if SUV’s are indeed so dangerous (to smaller cars), it is the smaller cars that should be banned.

I didn’t make this up. I’ve heard the argument before. At the time, we all laughed about it and didn’t take it seriously. Now, it seems, we’re coming face to face with it. The new norms, as presented to us, clearly strive to downsize America.

My question is: How far down are we willing to go? What exactly does Obama have in mind? Perhaps the ‘greens’ can give us some clue: A country bereft of energy; its people taking up farming, herding, bartering, canning… Sounds like Pol Pot to some degree. (I don’t think that Obama would send his goons out to shoot me for lighting up a cigarette or reading a book; but who knows, all that might still be in the offing. Neither would Obama order the burning of medical journals as the Taliban are wont to do. But the effect of Obamacare would essentially amount to the same.)

There are many ways to skin a cat – or fox. I’m sure Obama knows them all. Yesterday, I noted from my stats that nobody read anything I posted on my blog that day. I was convinced that someone had blocked my feed. It seemed reasonable to assume, especially since it’s been going blazes. Today, it’s back to normal. I do wonder what happened.

As for the fox: There has been a fox that parked itself all morning in our backyard, enjoying the trickle of sun. He was a chubby, healthy looking thing; lazy as all get out; yawning, snoozing, stretching, and the like. There’s a specific spot by the old sugar maple where all the animals come when they’re hurt. Last year, a deer with a bum leg spent a couple of days there, its mate alert and watching from across the fence. After a couple of days, both wandered off as if nothing had happened. I remember, a long time ago, our various cats would hang out there as well.

I believe there are specific spots on this earth that are ‘power centers’. Usually great cities are built around such places. I’m wondering if it is possible to kill such spots – pave them over; seal them. Probably not. If so, what’s happened to Detroit? (The obvious answer is liberalism.) What else might be hatching there?

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

The Music Of the Primes

A guitar can be considered both, a musical instrument as well as percussion. Therefore a man alone with a guitar can often make credible music. Percussion came first - the big bang - then another, and another (echoes)… Then came a more gentle sound, probably in the form of wailing. When the wailing adapted itself to the beat, music was born. Finally, there was the ‘word’ and history began in earnest.

Similarly, harmony is a blend of the secular and the spirit. For the spirit to soar, it needs the discipline of a steady pulse. There has been undue emphasis on just pulse lately. Sound has been allowed to become discordant - the din of people expressing disparate agonies - every nation divided, pulling both ways. Voices shouting slogans in short, bumper sticker bursts mimic the staccato of an incomplete drum set. It has become a lingering sign of our times - 'The WHO' destroying their instruments at the end of the set. Drumsticks tossed into the audience. What are they going to do with them except clobber each other?

We are regressing. The drums of war are heard all around. Even God has been roused from his lofty abode and is seen hurling lightning bolts mindlessly here and there. The ground under Haiti trembles, and over a year later we still cannot cope. Iran threatens, and we shrink from our duty to stop it. And today, Japan stands helplessly while watching a wall of water advancing.

America too watches helplessly as it is being consumed by a tsunami of debt. In New York, the most expensive musical ever is being kept off-line while the bodies drop from the wires.

Curious about Spiderman: The day before Glenn Beck quit the airwaves in New York, he delivered and impassioned endorsement of Spiderman. He claimed that it represents a huge step forward in live theater, akin (perhaps) to switching from watching black and white to color TV. He spent a full half hour praising this show, saying (and I paraphrase) it is definitely worth the price of an over-inflated ticket and even the added cost of a flight from anywhere.

I remember thinking that Beck might simply be honoring some contractual obligation. Or, did he really believed what he was saying? I was torn, but leaning towards the latter. For one thing, he had high praise for the script (and music). He warned that liberals - especially New York liberals - would not like the story. Ticket sales spiked immediately after Beck’s show. Then, other reviews started filtering in. These, as expected, were overwhelmingly negative.

It is entirely possible that a conservative narrative cannot survive on Broadway. In today’s hyper-partisan climate, even the skeletal music of Bono, it seems, cannot endure the drumming of the ideological fist.

While in many ways the staccato bursts of gunfire in the Middle East seem to dominate our own narratives, 'The WHO’s classic coda to “My Generation” comes immediately to mind. And with it, the final scene of smashed guitars and sparking amplifiers.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

...and liberals applaud

The headlines this morning read that the reason for Hu’s visit to the U.S. was to proclaim to the world that China is now equal to the U.S. It has also been quite apparent for some time that China is on the rise (while America is in decline). Therefore, it can be now be said with some certainty that China will overtake the U.S. in the future. Such is the narrative of the (popular mechanics) press at any rate. …and liberals applaud.

There are, however, still some facts on the ground that put the lie to this view. The Chinese economy is clearly only a fraction of the U.S.’s. China’s military might, while growing, also lags behind. The difference as it stands now is in the willingness each country exhibits in using these to advantage. China has shown it is serious about overtaking the U.S., while America, under the current administration, could care less about maintaining its edge.

We have come to a critical point in world history. For the first time, we have an administration whose fundamental view is that America should not be preeminent on the world stage and is actively seeking to bring this about. It has happily abandoned the notion of American ‘exceptionalism’ and gone to foreign shores to apologize for America over and over again. At the same time, it has all but abandoned its traditional allies and sought to embrace its enemies.

The strategy, if there ever was one, was to ease points of friction by simply stopping the wheels. It has not worked. Unilaterally deciding to step aside and end our resistance to the thrusts of our traditional enemies will not automatically make them into friends. Instead, they will interpret this as a sign of weakness and double down on their efforts. Meanwhile, our friends are heading for the tall grass.

So far, our media has put down sundry omissions and missteps in diplomatic protocol to our president’s inexperience. In the diplomatic world, however, no serious player would return symbolic gifts to allies, offer inappropriate gifts to heads of state, bow to lesser leaders, inadvertently fly foreign flags upside down, or misspell the names of foreign dignitaries on White House table settings. Just not done.

Lang Lang’s ‘prank’ was not a mistake. It was carefully and deliberately orchestrated with the full knowledge of Chinese leadership. It was meant primarily for home consumption, showing that China is running rings around a timid and uninformed America. (Chavez pulled a similar stunt.) It is the equivalent of Chinese proxy North Korea sinking the Cheonan or bombing a South Korean (populated) island with impunity.

As is his way, Obama, the President of the United States, leader of our nation, just sits there in seemingly ignorant bliss and allows the credibility of our once great nation get dragged through the mud. No doubt Hu Jintao (as well as bin Laden) has seen the pictures of American soldiers tied to the backs of Toyota pick-ups being dragged through the streets of Mogadishu. It’s doubtful that Obama’s memory goes back that far.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Apple Scruffs (How I Love You)

While I too tend to drool at the stylistic innovations of Apple products, I have never quite been tempted to buy into it. Apple, it seems, operates on the same principle of the marketing model of American car companies during the late fifties to mid-sixties. Their thrust was two-fold. One, the cars wore out after two years. And, two, after two years, the styles had changed so dramatically, nobody would want to be seen in cars two (or more) years old. The latest models were unleashed on the public with such fanfare and ferocity, it kept the cycle of trading-in the old cars for new ones in high gear.

When I went to get my iPod fixed some years ago (the battery was bad), I was told that it would be cheaper for me to get a new one (which even had additional features to entice me). Innovations are deliberatively held back to be included in next year’s model. But nobody is willing to wait that long, so they buy what’s available now, and the following year they buy again.

It’s a brilliant, all-American sales strategy that applies to women’s fashions as well. Hat tip, Steve Jobs!

Ironically, Apple products have also assumed a political dimension. Self-proclaimed liberals in particular can not seem to do without. It’s become a symbol of progressive, left-wing politics to own Apple products; much like the Volvo brand. The irony is that the Apple sales strategy flies in the face of openly professed liberal lip service in support of conservation.

The flashy cars of the sixties eventually would come face to face with the reality of more durable foreign imports, and consumers flocked to the competition in droves. Apple reminds of what’s left of the ‘trendy’, "keeping up with the Jones's" mindset. It works because an investment in Apple is not as great as an investment in a car.

As our economy continues to erode and after Apple too has been dashed upon the shoals of necessity, some toothbrush company will be attempting what Apple is doing now.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Liberals - 1; Conservatives - 0

January 8th, 2011

Urgent: Flash e-mail from the White House: A message from OFA (Organizing for America) national volunteer coordinators:

Dear Blogger: By now you’ve heard the news. Time to mobilize. What just happened in Arizona (where else?) is more than murder. This is our opportunity to invigorate some of our policy objectives. Target gun control and talk radio (Limbaugh, Beck, etc.). Target the internet and capital punishment. Target Palin. For suggestions, go to xxx@yyy.com for templates and suggestions.

Get busy. Support the cause. Support Democrats. Support your president. Prizes for the most e-mails sent.

Remember, never let a crisis go to waste.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The above fiction is nevertheless believable. How else can we explain the current feeding frenzy in the press and on the blogs? Clearly, what happened was a personal tragedy for all those hurt and killed. Also clear is that it’s a stretch to involve people who had nothing whatsoever to do with it.

More than the wounding and murders themselves, the real tragedy is what immediately followed. I differ from Limbaugh in one important respect: Whereas he sees it as a one last-ditch desperate effort - a ‘Hail Mary pass', if you wish - by liberalism losing steam, I see it as only the beginning - the opening salvo of what we can expect for the next two years. The media and Democrats are scoring big.

This morning, ‘The Hindu’, Chennai’s hometown newspaper will carry Paul Krugman’s column entitled “Climate of Hate”. In it he implicates and smears everyone who does not agree with his radical views. Indians will read this and, hearing no other American voices, will shake their heads sadly. Some who have relatives abroad will send e-mails to caution them. They will warn them of the Tea Parties, talk radio, FOX, the GOP, Palin, Beck, O’Reilly, conservatives, etc. All this will be done out of genuine concern and in good faith.

Talk show hosts are feeling the need to defend themselves today. Their faithful - even if in the numerical majority of the population - agree with them. But as a part of the overall national narrative they remain marginalized. Their protestations sound somehow hollow as the ball continues to roll left.

Liberals - 1; conservatives - 0

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Same As The Old Boss

With the illusion of American influence in world affairs rapidly fading, there are several players already making moves to fill in the gap. Of these, perhaps the most visible, is the UN. The UN, however, represents only a small shift away from U.S. (non)-policy. It is also strapped for cash, riddled with corruption, and highly politicized. It is either unable or unwilling to use force, depending instead on containment, negotiation and the paying of bribes. The UN takes no firm positions, tending instead to go along with the strong horse.

These are also the tendencies that have led to America’s downfall. There is no reason to expect the UN to succeed with the very same methods that have rendered America clownishly irrelelevant. Therefore, a UN high-profile presence in any of the world’s trouble spots will ultimately not make a significant difference.

Thus far the UN has been used primarily to reap money and concessions from America. It is fully in support of ‘global warming’ initiatives which are then used to put pressure on the United States to give more money and retract its claws. UN soldiers have been accused of plunder and rape. They have been accused of extortion. They have been uses as human shields. Though blind themselves, they have been used as seeing eye dogs. They are well recognized scofflaws to which any cop in New York can readily testify.

Where Israel is concerned, the UN’s bias against it has been legendary. The UN is heralded by New York’s liberal elites (including Jews) and Washington progressives as the 'be all and end all'. This is in part because of the UN’s appearance of civility. Members of the UN are well paid. They are given a lofty platform from which to opine; they tend to smile a lot; except when it is in their best interest to frown for a laugh line, usually at the expense of Israel.

If the people of the Cote D’Ivoire are depending on the UN to settle things, they’ve got a long wait. They’d do much better to look to themselves if their aim is to avoid another African genocide. I understand it’s in the blood over there. A volatile mix of religion - especially Islam - and politics practically guarantees chaos. This time the U.S. won’t ride to the rescue. Look at what’s just happened in Haiti, less than a thousand miles from our shores. We’ve engaged the services of not less than three living U.S. presidents (along with much fanfare) to help. The reason there has been no reporting on this is because all three have failed.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

China Laughing While U.S. Downgrades Military To Paintball

Why even bother to report it? (North Korea's continued provocations.) We no longer have a dog in the fight. We’ve shown quite unambiguously that we are no longer interested in fighting/winning. We seem to be intent on castrating our armed forces. We no longer see them as a blunt tool to support our now thoroughly compromised diplomacy; rather, we are in the process of re-shaping this once awesome tool to reflect some ‘less is more’ ideology with the vague expectation that the world will think this is great and follow our lead.

The damage this president has done to our military in his two years in office is astounding. First, he has ordered it to engage in a war without aiming to win. He has placed restrictions on our fighting men and women that make it difficult even to stay alive. Wikileaks enters into it at some level, as does the heroic repeal of ’don’t ask, don’t tell’.

I predict within less than a year, the military will be hard up for recruits and we may have to revert to something akin to the draft. The outlines of this are already apparent: amnesty for service. Until now, we have seen very few minorities among our fighting forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. This has to be pointed out because the Left has up until recently always falsely claimed that America only sends it minorities oversees and into harm’s way to fight it’s dirty wars. (They’ve since had to be content with complaining about the relatively high incarceration rate among certain minority communities.) All this will change.

Prisoners will now fight ‘clean’ wars. They will not be expected to win - only to stay alive while ordered to hand out food and bandages to the starving and wounded. Military missions oversees will likely evolve into setting up abortion and sex clinics, and (don’t forget) welfare offices, thus providing an ever escalating stream of entitlement clientele for liberals here at home to administer.

It is unlikely that China will go along with the program though, admittedly, they may laugh themselves silly and thus suffer some minor set-backs in their quest to take over the world.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Vamshavriksha

We may never know if Rahm was pushed or if he is fleeing. Not only Seib, but the MSM in general have portrayed the event as bitter-sweet. Unlike departures from the Bush White House - which were generally viewed as evidence of confusion and abject failure - Rahm’s leaving is being hailed as fresh and exciting opportunities for both Rahm and Obama.

It has become a mark of supreme enlightenment to couch every political criticism (especially on our side) in phrases such as “both Republicans and Democrats…” or, now, more to the point, “past (Republican) presidents as well”. By doing so, we are hoping to triangulate and place ourselves above the fray. This can only be a winning strategy if our side has the advantage. It is unclear at the moment just who holds the advantage. Certainly, as far as midterms are concerned, Republicans can be expected to reap huge numerical gains in Congress. But take elections out of the equation and one finds that the same conditions that brought Obama to power in 2008 still exist today. The country is deeply divided along ideological lines.

When scientists scratch the earth in remote regions of our planet and unearth the bones of our ancestors, they then try to connect the dots between what they have discovered thus far and what they continue to find. As such, they are hoping to construct a lineage that would explain from whence we arrived at this point in time.

When all they would really need to do is to study in minute detail the developing fetus. Therein lie all the clues to every stage of development the human species has undergone to date, from single-cell organisms, through our reptilian stage, all the way up to what we are today. Every human being precisely replicates every single stage of his (or her) development since the beginnings of time while gestating in his (or her) mother’s womb.

It’s the same with ideas. All we have to do is ask ourselves why we believe in what we believe - do it doggedly and systematically - and we would find that we have come to accept certain assumptions and hold them as truth. At some point we branched out into two distinct beings: liberals and conservatives. Liberals have further (d)evolved into the Left of the political spectrum; conservatives into the Right. By failing to ask what has created this divide, we are obscuring the origins of what has made us so different.

We no longer question the assumptions that support our position. We simply regurgitate what we are told that most closely approximates our natural leaning.

Once the tree branches, it never grows together again unless the branches are cut and are heaped together for the purpose of a kindling. Then fire consumes them both equally.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Destiny Demands a Decision

In some ways Paul Ryan and pols of any persuasion are like Obama: ideologues. They present themselves as right or left cut-outs and hope to sell it to a multifaceted public. The public resists. It understands the ruse. They ask, "Why should anyone reduce the rich and complex organism of himself (or group) to a formula so simple, so rudimentary, so primitive?

"And if ever the suspicion of his manifold persona should dawn on him… and break through his illusion of the single ideology he espouses, and perceive that every individual self is made up of a bundle of selves and interests, he has only to say so and at once the media puts him to pillory, calls science to aid, establishes the efficacy of padded cells, seeking to protect humanity from the necessity of hearing the truth. Why then waste words on proclamations, plans, pledges, and roadmaps that every thinking man accepts as self-evident, that America totters on the edge of existential threat, when a mere utterance of it is a breach of taste?”

What was true in Hermann Hesse’s day (in italics) is certainly true now. Perhaps even more so. For far too long we have used a shorthand for governance - Republican and Democrat; conservative and liberal; etc - while glossing over the fact that we were spinning the mesh of our web in an increasingly tighter and suffocating weave.

Now we have arrived, at a particularly virulent form of socialism, one that seeks to quash every dare of liberty and we ask ourselves, How has this happened? We were more than willing to entertain strange, even alien, notions. But we did so primarily out of curatorial interest, to be able to wag our fingers and proclaim ourselves better. American exceptionalism was ingrained in us. We never thought there was ever the possibility of letting it slipping away.

Now we find ourselves engaged in a great struggle. It is composed of a myriad of smaller struggles and each skirmish we win produces yet another head - or three. Are we willing to invest everything, or will we accept something as insipid as compromise. It seems to me we’ve been compromising all along. It’s even gone beyond face-saving. We’re into the real stuff now. Destiny demands a decision.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Shattered Windows

Actually Obama, a cold, heartless ruler, came along just at the right time, to remind us of just how bad it can be while our government is still functioning in a way as to give us some leverage. In a way, we can still say he’s inept. He has revealed his stripes (or spots) all too readily. He and his entourage of Democrats (I use the term loosely) will be defeated at the polls - eventually.

What is still unclear is our own capacity to learn - to remember - as to not fall for the twin ploy of promises that no one can keep, and lies. In an opinion column in today’s WSJ entitled “Why Obama Is Still the Favorite in 2012”, Michael Medved makes the case that the whole thing hinges on the Hispanic vote. No matter how desperate conditions in our country get, will Hispanics, Blacks and Asians still insist on voting race to the exclusion of all other (more weighty) factors? Clearly Democrats think so. That’s why a recent comment by Harry Reid, ('I don't know how ANYONE of Hispanic heritage could be Republican'…) raised such eyebrows - especially in conservative circles.

Whites themselves are divided. Though there is some indication the white liberals are having second thoughts, the rest apparently are content to tough it out. A steady stream of dismal economic data will not convince them. The popular media will continue to drive the narrative: blame Bush, Republicans, conservatism; etc. As Kenneth Stevens so artfully explains in post after post, race is fast becoming the driving force behind everything. Perhaps it already has.

We still have a chance to turn it around, but the window is closing. The re-election of Barack Hussein Obama in 2012 would shatter the window and replace it with bars.

Too Many Good People Are Getting Hurt

Current popular lore has it that Democrats, Leftists and liberals are nurturing and caring, always looking to curb human excesses, exploitation, and the oppression (by industry) of their adoring masses. On the other hand, Republicans and conservatives are seen as predatory, smart, solitary, and dangerously self-reliant. In truth, it’s not quite as simple as all that. Within each category there exist both leaders and followers. The leaders on either side have actually more in common than what both have in common with each of their assumed disparate flock. Simply put, it all boils down to leaders and followers, ideology representing the pigskin for each team to advance for the pleasure of the delirious, cheering crowd in the stands.

All this would be very nice if after the game we could just go home, put our feet up in front of the telly while downing a couple of brews. The problem arises when the deadly serious, highly motivated men on the field demand their share of the take way beyond the fair value of the ticket price - win or lose - from the good folk who consent to watching the game.

The inflated egos of the players demands that their followers tow the party line and wear the team colors both on and off the field. They see to it that anyone refusing to go along be stripped of their innate right to belong.

Thus ideology is assigned - Democrat or Republican - while the game rages on in Washington. Independents are courted ceaselessly by both sides. It is beyond either side to imagine that someone would actually opt to choose ‘neither of the above’. Yet, as it becomes increasingly obvious that the game is fixed, ‘neither of the above’ increasingly becomes the appropriate choice.

It has become virtually impossible to ignore the game. Our last election made it obvious that elections set the tone. While it remains a matter of dispute just what the song should sound like, most of us have come to regret our choice. Naturally, we will choose a different tune the next time around - but we will do so with reservations. After all, we’d already tried the other one that, in the fog of time, now seems to have been better than what we have now; but which nevertheless fails to fully explain how we’ve managed to get here so fast. Clearly, Republicans are licking their chops in anticipation of a major blowout favoring them.

This in itself is worrying. Who among us expects Republicans to do much to turn things around? Who among us does not suspect that it’s all just a set-up for Obama’s second term?

Liberal leaders are just as crafty and resourceful as their conservative counterparts. They could match wits with each other any time of day. Do not put it beyond them to collude with each other behind the scenes trying to pull off a ‘good cop/bad cop’ routine.

Right now we’ve just finished witnessing a classic case of crony capitalism. The government indicts a major investment firm to much fanfare while promising them untold billions (just out of earshot). The investment house takes it lying down. Meanwhile, the government passes finreg, largely on the strength of said indictment. The very next day the case is resolved with a ceremonial slap on the wrist. Could anything be more obvious?

It’s not ideology; it’s become outright theft. And we’re the one’s left holding the bag. I wish I could laugh, but too many good people are getting hurt.

Betrayal

When we are first born we are nothing (as well as everything). We are equipped with specific tools chief of which is a sense of identity. It’s noteworthy that the first thing that usually happens is that we are given a name. The child opens its eyes and sees. And all it sees (it thinks) is a part of itself. It is only by learning the names of the people and objects around it that the divide between it and the outside world is established.

From there the child begins to make certain assumptions. He learns to manipulate specific objects - his mother, for instance - to get what he wants. She presumably knows what she must do in order to attend to his needs. He needs to eat; his diapers need to be changed. His dependence on her continues not as demand, but as expectation. It would never occur to him to say, “Thank you.”

The child’s name circumscribes his identity. His first allegiance is to himself (which now includes his parents). He does not see them as separate from himself. Later, as his world view expands, he must determine his own proper place within it.

No matter how complicated it may get, no matter how many paradoxes arise - all due to and resting on false assumptions - the shadow of his first life experience remains: I am (singularly responsible, either through my action or inaction, for) all I see.

Religion derives from identity and the desire to secure for oneself a place within eternity. In this, one’s assumptions become critical. Clearly the lion’s share of one’s efforts go towards achieving and maintaining one’s target position. The time may come when previous alliances and dependencies are no longer useful. These are then jettisoned. Guilt may arise from such acts as abandonment or betrayal that may have become essential to the service of one’s perceived (greater) self. Meanwhile, the shadow of one’s very first assumptions invariably come back to haunt.

Only saints are spared this dilemma. At this juncture ordinary people are faced with a choice: either to recognize and accept their limitations; or to strive for ever greater control on one hand, or utter dependence on the other.

Hinduism recognized this dilemma from the start. It created the caste system within which everybody is assigned their place. The promise of a higher entry into the next life (provided that one adheres honorably to one’s duties) helps the lower casts to endure. Only wise men realize that it is only a matter of appearances; that suffering as well as joy is spread out evenly among all.

In the West every individual is held responsible for his own fate, which (whether one admits it or not) extends to the afterlife. As we are our own severest critics the question of salvation comes into play. Liberals tend to fall victim to ego from which stems the infantile presumption of utter co-dependence with the universe. Therefore, for just one to be saved, all must be saved. Conservatives tend to harbor more modest ambitions. They are content with saving only themselves and perhaps a few others. They also tend to be happier, successful and self-satisfied.

Point of note: Identity drives all. This is why only a man of outside lineage can agree to commit an act of betrayal.