Another deeply unappealing decision

Just a few thoughts on the highly probable nomination and rather likely ultimate victory of Hillary Clinton as the next POTUS:

1) Criticism of Clinton is not inherently sexist.

2) A lot of criticism of Clinton WILL be and IS sexist. And not just from Trump.

3) Anyone about to criticize Clinton would do well to pause long enough to ask 'would I criticize a rich white male candidate the same way?'

4) Names are going to be tricky. First man? Mrs./Madam President? When she visits Saudi Arabia, will she wear a head scarf? Lots of etiquette to grapple with.

5) Clinton is somewhat to the left of the American median on certain social issues, particularly those pertaining to women. In every other respect, she is center right or (in foreign policy) an out-and-out hawk. She is not a liberal ...

5a) ... I think. It's hard to say given how quiet she is on actually positions. This isn't as bad as it was to start the campaign, but she still shies away from actually opining on anything controversial, or as in Keystone, she waits until public opinion is clear and then sneaks out a presser where it's sure to be buried by the Pope's visit or other major news stories.

6) She is to Obama on transparent government and civil liberties as Obama is to John Yoo. That's not a compliment, and it's not just her email, either. She just doesn't seem to care about these issues.

7) She is thoroughly artificial and, as shown by the ongoing charlie-foxtrot of her emails, more than a little dishonest.

8) Not all of which is entirely her fault. The dishonesty, yes, but if I spent 25 years, sometimes bruising and often intensely personal, in the political spotlight, I'd probably be a little control-freakish myself. That doesn't make it a good quality to have in a president - it isn't - but it's probably unavoidable if we're going to have candidates with the depth and breadth of experience Clinton brings.

9) I could see myself voting for a moderate Republican over Clinton.

10) No such Republican has a chance of facing her. Trump isn't going to win, but neither is anyone who is willing to stand up and tell his voters that everything he's promising is bullshit.

And 11) Unless something truly bizarre should occur, I'll be voting for her in 13 months. Woo.

(inspired by this column from a few months back: http://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/columnists/charles-krauthammer/2015/04/21/krauthammer-queen-hillary-coronation/26090519/)

Yesterday, evil won

EDIT: I appear to have placed too much faith in the Great State of South Carolina: contrary to statements below, it appears the Confederate flag outside the capitol building was NOT lowered to half mast when the US and SC flags were lowered. Instead, they left it at full height. So that's, you know, horrifying. http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20150618/PC16/150619374

Ok. Let's talk about Charleston.

First off, in case anyone was still puzzled about whatever could have inspired Dylann Roof to kill 9 people in Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church (Looking at you, Rudy Gulianihttp://talkingpointsmemo.com/…/rudy-giuliani-charleston-chu…), let me lay your confusion to rest: He hated black people. He wore clothing with apartheid-era flags from African nations, he told his roommate (who should be remembered for the rest of his life as a feckless imbecile who could have spoken up and didn't) repeatedly that he wanted to spark a new civil war between whites and blacks, and he told one of the survivors in the church that "You rape our women and you’re taking over our country and you have to go." This was not a jilted lover going overboard, this was not a bout of delusion or mental illness, this was racism.

What makes America exceptional

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2015/06/03/obama-and-american-exceptionalism/?tid=sm_tw

This is an interesting article, and one that helps me understand a distinction I had not previously recognized. I do not believe America is the greatest country on Earth. Even if such a subjective statement could be quantified, there is no possible metric by which America can be said to stand above all others (and yes, the opening monologue from The Newsroom is on point here) ... except, perhaps, for aspiration.

More people want to be in America, to become American, than any other nation. The reason for that is not (or shouldn't be) quality of life; otherwise, the most popular nation on Earth would be Sweden, probably. And yet people aspire to be like us, or like our best vision of ourselves, because moreso than any other country, we aspire to be better too. And as the article says, it's not been the wealthy and privileged who've striven for continuous improvement in America: it's been "the ability of the unsung and the outsiders to challenge the country’s elite and force change."

After the scripture reading, part 3

I love my job, but there's a drawback to being a courts reporter. Several really ugly crimes are up for me to write about in the next week or two, which means lots of reading really ugly criminal complaints. Everything is not ok.

Anyway, a lighter diversion is my recurring series on the scriptures chosen each week for our church services, and the frequently funny, horrible or otherwise discordant passages that come immediately afterward. This week comes to us a passage from Revelation, chapter 5 verses 11-14:

11 Then I looked, and I heard the voice of many angels around the throne and the living creatures and the elders; and the number of them was myriads of myriads, and thousands of thousands, 12 saying with a loud voice,

“Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power and riches and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing.”

13 And every created thing which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all things in them, I heard saying,

“To Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, be blessing and honor and glory and dominion forever and ever.”

14 And the four living creatures kept saying, “Amen.” And the elders fell down and worshiped.

Which is a very nice passage, although best taken with a grain of salt: the fact that a snippet of meaningful imagery should slip its way into the torrent of hallucinogenic froth that is Revelation is no more surprising - and no more meaningful - than that the face of the Virgin Mary should on rare occasion manifest itself on pieces of toast.

So, what comes next? Why, Revelation 6, of course! Which, if you're too lazy to click the link, is the classic bit where the four horsemen are introduced: Conquest, War, Famine and Death.

Not one stone will be left on top of another

Fuck Baltimore.

I can't find the post now, but at one point during the resurgent riots after a Missouri prosecutor massaged a grand jury to ensure he had a fig leaf not to charge Darren Wilson, I wrote on one social media or another something to the effect that I was torn, that rioting would only be more ammunition for those who support police in their brutality, but that if I were a young black man in Ferguson, I'd probably be out there overturning cars as well.

I am no longer conflicted.

After the scripture reading, part 2

Maybe I'll make a series of this. I'm thinking this might be a fun ongoing project.

This week's scripture was Acts 16:23-34, which is the bit about Paul and Silas in jail and there's an earthquake but they don't run away and then they tell the jailer not to kill himself and then he becomes Christian and gets his whole family saved with him whether they become Christian themselves or not because woo.

Ok, that last bit was uncalled for. It's fairly standard for biblical texts to present decisions by patriarchal males as group decisions. And it does say the rest of the household rejoiced with him, so I guess it wasn't too onerous to change religions overnight.

But anyway, that's what was chosen to read in church. What comes immediately after? Is it horrible, like the two I cited last week? Well, not really, but there's a reason this passage isn't cited as much: it's Paul playing politics.

Reading between the (approved) lines

My favorite part of scripture readings at church is reading the verses immediately AFTER the chosen reading, which are invariably horrid. The reading ending with Isaiah 25:9 misses the wonderous bit in verses 10 and 11 about how the Moabites will be crushed into a dungheap, and EVEN THOUGH they spread out their arms like swimmers to stay afloat in the poop, STILL the Lord will smoosh them in deeper. A truly lovely picture of a loving God.

Or this week, the scripture was the bit at the end of Acts 4 about how the early Christians were actually as determinedly anti-Capitalist as a society can be, which is cool. And then it ended, and I kept reading the bit about Ananias and Sapphira, where God murders two people for being generous, but not generous enough. Because the Lord Almighty was Stalinist before Stalinism was a thing, yo. Still had a little Old Testament to get out of his system, maybe?

The first is less unsettling than the second - God may be disgusting and prone to stomping people who already are down, but at least isn't murdering them out of spite - but both are still definitely not high points for the biblical God. And yet more reason why anyone who claims their morality stems for a literal reading of the Bible is either full of (but not drowning in!) shit, or utterly insane.