I Don't Believe It

Drunk driver crashes into house
wearing t-shirt that says,
“I have a drinking problem.”

Many pundits and others are predicting a huge Republican victory in November. For some it seems to be a foregone conclusion that Republicans will take over the House of Representatives, and there is hope even for the Senate. Even those who don’t necessarily believe this is a sure thing believe there is a good possibility it will happen. I don’t believe it. My political predictions have not been very accurate in the past, and of course I could be wrong, but I just plain cannot believe this will happen.

If it were the case that the Republican Party was truly and clearly split into two parts, the minority part being the Tea Party and the majority being more or less reasonable people, I might believe otherwise. But the split that is widely cited does not seem to be at all clear, moderate Republicans (if they still exist) are not disowning or disavowing the Tea Party candidates. Indeed, the Republican Party is in most cases actively supporting this rather lunatic fringe, the line between the Tea Party people and others in the Republican Party is not at all clear anymore. And if you consider what the Republicans say they will do once they get in office you can only conclude that it is equally as radical (and insanely undesirable) as anything proposed by the Tea Party. I will not list these goals here but you know they have to do with privatizing Social Security, giving huge tax breaks to the wealthy, and turning over Roe vs Wade, if they could, along with other equally deleterious aims. This is why I cannot believe they will win much of anything next month. My reasoning is simple. In spite of my dim view of the American voting public, in spite of my usual cynicism, in spite of what so many others are predicting, I absolutely cannot bring myself to believe that a majority of the American voting public could possibly be stupid enough to allow this to happen. So, if I prove to be wrong, let it be for a good reason. These various Republican candidates, along with the stated goals of the Republican Party, should they win, are so extreme, so “far out,” so potentially destructive, so (in my opinion) insane, I can’t believe they can produce a victory.

I seriously believe we should establish at least some minimum prerequisites for running for high-level political positions, especially for Senators and President. There should be some way of screening out candidates who are clearly not qualified or suitable for office, the O’Donnell’s and Angle’s, for example. Not only that, I would go farther and suggest that if a candidate somehow slips through the vetting process and actually gets elected, and then proves to be some kind of obstructionist nincompoop, there should be an easier way to get rid of them. I should think that the control of our country is too important to be put in the hands of know-nothings who seem to be ignorant of even the most basic facts of human, social, and cultural life in the 21st century, individuals too ignorant even to understand the importance of the science and scientific research that underlies our current existence. Even individuals who prove through their tenure in office they put personal and party interests ahead of the welfare of citizens should be removed (actually, they sometimes are, but only when their criminality becomes truly extreme). Our current political system is already probably too corrupt to be changed, when you have people who are elected mostly on the basis merely of becoming shills for corporations and big business, you don’t have to be much concerned if they know anything or not, you just have to be confident they do not have the public interest in mind.

Speaking of tenure, I am motivated to comment. In recent years there have been cases where established professors have been forced to defend their actions or behavior or lose their tenure. At the moment it appears the Governor of New Jersey is threatening the tenure system of teachers, wanting to fire those that might be regarded as incompetent. I believe there is a lot of misunderstanding about tenure. As I understand it, having been a University Professor for quite a long time, the tenure system was not designed to give permanence of employment to teachers just because of longevity. The basic importance of tenure has to do with the guarantee of free speech. That is, professors should not be fired because they hold certain political beliefs, or are somehow out of the mainstream of political opinion. Over the years this seems to have become more or less forgotten or neglected, in favor of arguments over competence or ability when teaching. It should not be too difficult to examine individual cases and determine if the motivation for stripping away tenure is political as opposed to incompetence. There have always been means available to get rid of incompetent teachers, but somehow this has been made more and more difficult and has not been widely employed. If we are to become more serious about our educational system, especially in improving it, this is obviously going to become an even more important issue. To just do away with tenure entirely would be a terrible mistake.

LKBIQ:
Just think of the tragedy of teaching children not to doubt.
Clarence Darrow

TILT:
Evidence for human activity having to do with the production of salt dates back at least to 6050 B.C.