The Meaning Of The United States Being The Visual Appearance Of Gravity Being Safe From Outer Space

I want to examine the following paradigm: that the United States is the visual appearance of gravity being safe from outer space.

A United States that is the image of gravity being safe from outer space is an outer space that is not the image of gravity being in danger because of the United States. An outer space that is the opposite of the appearance of gravity being in danger because of the United States is the external of planets being the threat of the United States toward gravity.

The external of planets being the threat of the United States toward gravity is gravity being the safety of the United States toward the external of planets: gravity is the force that gives the United States (or any nation) the ability to protect outer space.

A nation is a fiction. Gravity is reality, and so is the external of planets – a reality that gives fiction the ability to protect reality is a reality that doesn’t give fiction the ability to hurt reality (a reality that gives fiction the ability to protect reality).

In other words: gravity and outer space are in cahoots with each other, in order to keep each other safe, and nations and the US (especially the US – because of the popular and grandstanding nature of the US) are the devices that gravity and outer space use to keep each other safe.

It can be nations (such as Russia, the UK, Ireland, Iraq or Brazil). It can be cultures (such as Christianity, Islam, Hollywood, Sport, University or American sororities and fraternities). It can be societies (such as the society of London, the society of Washington D.C, the society of Los Angeles or the society of Berlin). It can be politics (such as the politics of Italy, the politics of China, the politics of Russia or the politics of France). Whatever it is, the endgame and the true meaning is always the same: all of these elements, and all of these manifestations are all just fictions, however, they’re also fictions that have all been intended by reality as a way to allow the actual manifestations and the actual elements of reality to protect each other – especially gravity, planets and galaxies.

Why We Need CALM Public Leaders

Most of the time, Americans look to their public officials, to provide CALM leadership, which steadies – the – ship, and provides encouragement, thus strengthening the faith, of our citizens, in our system of government! Although, public leadership, is often challenging, it is incumbent upon these leaders, to articulate a positive message, focused on the common good, and based, consistently on the freedoms and liberties, protected and provided, by the U.S. Constitution. In recent times, we have observed, far less, apparent willingness, to transform, from politician to statesman, when elected, and this has brought about, more polarizing, adversarial relationships, which often unsettles many. Excessive vitriol, empty rhetoric and promises, rarely achieves, a calming of the fears, perceptions, etc, of our citizens. With that in mind, this article will attempt to briefly identify, consider, discuss, using the mnemonic approach, some of the reasons, and benefits, of calm public officials.

1. Character; creative; consider; cooperate; clever: While some agree with, while others disagree, with the political agenda of President Trump, the negative considerations, generally, include, not only policy considerations, but the man’s core, and character. The Make America Great Again, focus, as well as the America First, agenda, often, lack the creativity, to consider options and alternatives, rather than, merely, the same – old, same – old! Because of this individual’s emphasis on gaining political support from his core followers, and supporters, instead of a nation, focused on cooperation, we have witnessed, one focused on political poles! Although Trump, seems to believe, he has all the answers, and appears to resist and dislike opposing perspectives, etc, we would be better served, by a public official clever – enough, to recognize, leading is not about populism, but rather considers ramifications, and prepares accordingly!

2. Astute; attention; aptitude; attitude; articulate: Wouldn’t we be better off, if we elected officials, who were astute, enough, to pay keen attention, to the bigger – picture? When a public official, develops the aptitude, and relevant, skill – set, and combines this, with a positive, can – do, attitude, he moves forward, and articulates an inspiring, motivating message, for the common good!

3. Listen; learn; leadership: No one has all the answers, and therefore, an elected official, should commit to effectively listen, and learn, from every conversation, and experience! Now, more than ever, we need, effective, cooperative leadership, based on serving, the best interests of America!

4. Motivate; make mark; master: If one, really, wanted to make his mark, for the better, he would focus, consistently, on motivating and inspiring, all his constituents, instead of, only his base! Smart leaders master the necessities of providing calm, confidence, in their constituents, not merely based on rhetoric and promises, but on viable solutions and ideas!

Wake up America, and pay attention to the character of any prospective candidate! Look for someone who is ready, willing and able to provide CALM leadership.

Manipulative Aphorisms Used By The Media In Politics

Much to our chagrin, the world, and most specially in the United States, a perverse and very manipulative nomenclature, based on a number of tricky aphorisms, have been coined and used for some time now by the Media. It is something that not only confounds and distorts, but misinforms and misleads as well. It is in fact, a clever form of psychological manipulation to socially influence, with the aim to change and advance the interests of the manipulator and associates; most times, contrary to People’s interests and well being. It is commonly thought to include an element of moral disapprobation and even ridicule. Some of these harmful aphorisms ought to be taken generally, with a “grain of salt” wherever, whatever or whenever found:

1. Populist Politician: It is mentioned with a certain disdain and sarcasm, to describe a politician who is interested or associated, mostly with those causes upholding people’s rights and interests even against those of big money, big enterprise.

2. Liberal Politician: It is mentioned with a certain disdain and sarcasm, to describe a politician who proposes, supports or furthers social, economics, and political reforms sometimes contrary to the establishment and big economic interests.

3. Socialist Politician: It is mentioned contemptuously and disdainfully, to describe a politician whose main philosophy is the economic, social and political justice for all society, specially the least advantaged, disfranchised and the poorer of the country. He is portrait oftentimes as having communist tendencies.

4. Progressive Politician: It is mentioned with a certain disdain and sarcasm, to describe a politician who purports or supports certain causes or agendas, not necessarily accepted by main stream or traditional institutions, religious groups or conventional social philosophies

5. Conservative Politician: It is mentioned with a certain tone of approval to describe a politician who purports or supports those causes or agendas defended by big money, big interest or business, traditional values, certain religious groups, or philosophies like those of the “National Rifle Association”; “right wing Mackinlerism”, “White supremacy Groups” and opposes government expenditure on social programs like welfare, food stamps, universal health insurance, etc.

6. Left Wing Politician: It is mentioned with a certain disdain and derogatory tone, to describe a politician who purports or supports those agendas opposing mainstream political thought and is associated as a “progressive”, “socialists” or “liberal” politician. Right Wing Politician, are those contrary Left wing ideology.

7. “Trumpist Politician”: This is one of those most recent coined aphorisms lately used more and more by the Media, to describe the type of very unusual Philosophy and politics promulgated by Donald Trump, current President of the United States. It tends to describe something that is uncertain, farfetched, illogical, regressive, and unfounded. There are few politicians embracing this philosophy but they are found basically in Deep South States.

These are the main or most utilized aphorisms used today by the North American News media in their daily exercise in the written press, television and the Internet. They have a profound impact in the perceptions among readers and corresponding effect vis a vis politicians, their parties and programs. In many ways, they have and still are contributing greatly to the outcome of electoral results. They show two basically types of users: those belonging to special groups or Interests control and most to a group of pundits ill informed, uneducated, lacking in historical, political and social sciences education.

Just take these observations carefully, when ready to go one way or the other in terms of political analysis of news and commentaries. Don’t take everything for granted, exercise prudence and good judgment. This will allow you to make GOOD political decisions.

Hope and Strategic Thinking: Historical Lessons for Dark Times

As I approach birthday 75 at the end of July, there is a darkness and panic abroad comparable to 1942, the year before my birth. Our nation was losing a desperate two ocean war that seemed hopeless until the Battle of Midway in June 1942. British and American forces “survived the initial hammer blows of 1940-41,” according to naval historian Craig Symonds, “and could now contemplate taking the initiative.” Bold, determined leadership was at the helm in Britain and the United States and, equally important, was supported by their electorates despite waves of horrible news. We have forgotten the years of desperation and hopelessness as Germany and Japan embarrassed our forces in one engagement after another. (1)

Looking at our nation today from the perspective of the values that won the Second World War, I see a constitutional system receiving numerous hammer blows. Resistance to Trumpism is loud and growing yet lacking organized leadership and strategy. Still, battles must be waged at our Southern border and in the Senate, or wherever Trumpian flashpoints occur. But the most strategic battles now taking place are in races for Congress and Senate. Victory over the forces of darkness is only possible if the Party of Trump loses majorities in the House and Senate in November.

Let us not deceive ourselves. Victory in November is a matter of survival to halt damage to our nation and provide a base for taking the initiative. A strategy for victory must be waged in Congress, in the courts, and in the presidential election of 2020 to overcome the forces threatening to overwhelm our constitutional democracy and world peace. The election of 2018 may be compared to the Battle of Midway which, Craig Symonds reminds us, was a defensive stand that made it possible for the Allies to go on the offensive against the Germans in North Africa and the Japanese in Guadalcanal. Symonds also reminds us of Churchill’s assessment in November 1942, recognizing a turning of the tide that was only “the end of the beginning.” (2)

Feeling overwhelmed by the daily barrage of disgusting public actions and statements by the party in power, I have turned for solace to reading histories by Craig Symonds and Jon Meacham. Symonds’ comprehensive World War II At Sea is an unemotional accounting of the superiority of German and Japanese naval forces and of the desperately low fortunes of British and American forces until late 1942. It is amazing the calming effect that is found in reading about a time of utter hopelessness which nevertheless turned into victory.

Jon Meacham’s The Soul of America is calming for a different reason. We are experiencing another round of an internal struggle that keeps recurring – and the “better angels” usually win. Trump’s rally speeches bring Hitler’s ranting tirades to mind, as ICE agents remind us of brownshirts wreaking havoc among political opponents. A more American example, based on Meacham’s account, is Senator Joseph McCarthy whose personality, character, and use of the media have been updated in the Trump presidency. (3)

According to Roy Cohn, the lawyer for McCarthy who was a mentor for Trump, the Senator’s downfall came when the public tired of his endless salesmanship and media overexposure. This leads to hope that I am not the only citizen tired of the ruthless daily media barrage – and that perhaps national Trump fatigue may save our political system. The political rally in Montana on July 5 may indicate the tide is about to turn, for the audience was notably smaller and those standing behind the President rolled their eyes or showed less enthusiasm for his train of verbal indiscretions.

The international system sponsored by the United States since the Second World War has promoted peace and economic development throughout the world. It has not been perfect, but it has drawn most nations into a system that can be improved to work for everyone.

I am disturbed to see, toward the end of my life, an American President setting out to destroy the American world order that has worked pretty well for most of my life. Reading histories by scholars like Symonds and Meacham calms me and builds determination to help turn the tide of Trumpism. Perhaps others in the Resistance can draw strength from these and other histories as we do our best to ensure that November elections begin restoring balance and stability to the world.

Notes.

(1) Craig L. Symonds, World War II At Sea: A Global History (New York: Oxford University Press, 2018), 268.

(2) Ibid.

(3) Jon Meacham, The Soul of America: The Battle for Our Better Angels (New York: Random House, 2018), 184-203.

Dr. Edward G. Simmons was born in Savannah, Georgia, in 1943. A graduate of Mercer University, he earned both an M.A. and Ph.D. from Vanderbilt University. Dr. Simmons taught history at Appalachian State University until he was drafted to serve during the Vietnam era. Stationed in California, South Dakota, and then Georgia, he served in the Air Force. Dr. Simmons then became an expert in the field of organizational management as a result of thirty-four years of service for the Georgia Department of Human Resources. In retirement, he teaches history part-time at Georgia Gwinnett College and Brenau University. He is the author of Talking Back to the Bible: A Historian’s Approach to Bible Study.