The Family Name

If you have read all my posts you know I was adopted by my namesake. My birth name and my natural father were both inconstant with the truth of my life.  My Mother existed in an age where women were judged by the men in their lives, rather than the life in their lives. She wanted desperately for me to have a name that matched hers; social stigma being what it was. This meant any man that married her had to adopt me. It was part of the bargain she made with herself and her ethos. 

Speed now through a seventy two year odyssey of life that included teenage years in trouble with the law; a stint in the Marine Corps; and a wandering period that took me from Indiana to the Virgin Islands to southern California. Tired of odd jobs and living off girlfriends, I went to school on the GI Bill - Software Programmer. It was a new thing back then.

In the 50 years that followed I have made and lost a million dollars at least twice; had two successful small companies; received a Master Degree in IT Management; and had three great kids. I still do consulting to Fortune 100 companies today. I've done ok.

Thank's mom. 

I also had three failed marriages and a couple bankruptcies. No one's perfect.

Back in 1968, after I returned home from the Marines, mother told me who my natural father was. By that time he had four daughters. Apparently I was his only son. She spoke at length about how they met. The aftermath. The pain she endured. Her decisions. And even though it had been 21 years - I could tell she still carried a torch. It was quite a story. She told me all this in one hour, on one day, and never spoke of it again.

Fast forward to 2018 and we find a seventy two year old man that had always wondered who were the people in his 'other' family.  A new process that allowed DNA analysis might be the tool to find missing relatives. I wondered: Who are they? Did they ever find out about me? Do they have kids that are my half-nephews, etc? Were they good people? Were they happy? Did they need help? Were they even still alive? And what ever happened to my real dad?

I submitted my DNA test to both of the leading DNA testing companies at the time. When I got the results back, I found nothing. No close matches in either. Well, it was a long shot anyway.

Then after about a year, in the summer of 2019, I received an update on one of my DNA result reports. I had a "close 1st cousin with 1,700+ matching strands".  That's almost exactly what a half-sibling would see. 

I won't list names or identifying information here, but suffice to say that discovery started a series of blind emails, texts and high hopes that culminated in me finding my four sisters.  The resemblance is unmistakable. Two of my sisters and I were preparing to meet for the first time. 

Ok - So why am I posting this in a "Fixing America" blog? What does this personal tidbit have to do with anything?

Well, before our scheduled first meeting, I received an interrogatory request from the sisters via text message. The four questions were, in this order:

1. Did I have any other brothers or sisters? (not 'Do you have any children...' - not sure why this one - since they would share no DNA with my mother's other offspring)

2. Am I a Trump Supporter? (yes - that's the second most important question after 72 years)

3. Am I a Christian? (more important than my service record, but not as important as Trump support)

4. How long was I in the Marines? 

So this is america today. Of course I'm going to tell them that their long lost brother is NOT a Trump supporter and NOT a Christian, and both my other half-sister and half-brother are long gone.  

I'll miss that reunion.

However, I am proud of the four years in the Marines. And I am proud of America. I just wished we once again lived in an America where the questions were different.

JWB

UPDATE: My sister responded: They don't care about my beliefs, they are still anxious to meet their only brother! See, there IS hope left for America. We are all good people at heart. 

Guns Don't Kill

I am a former US Marine. Viet Nam. Four years active, two inactive.  I went in when I was seventeen.  Just to get away from home. Ha.

The effect of that decision was, of course, profound. I learned a lot in the Marines. One of the things I learned was that the National Rifle Association (NRA) is absolutely correct. Guns don't kill people, people do.

The problem is that the NRA is not interested, for self-serving reasons, in fixing this problem. They and their gun company benefactors make way too much money on uncontrolled access.

In the Marines we also learned one inescapable truth: Firearms were not developed for sport. They are developed for killing. Period. If guns were mainly for sport the gun industry would be out of business.

Thus, a Marine is taught, from day one, to respect a firearm for its intended use. You need to be fully aware that it is meant to kill - and whom or what it kills is up to the user. The weapon is equally deadly to the user, their family, bystanders or an enemy. The weapon does not care.

Training and knowledge are the Marine's tools. You train until correct decisions are instinctive. You learn respect for the weapon; how to maintain it; how to take it apart (yes, blindfolded) and reassemble. Each Marine spends countless hours of repetition in field training, the target range and even the classroom.

The weapon becomes almost a biological part of you. Whether running obstacle courses or sitting in a foxhole, it’s in hand at all times. It's an extension of your body. Drop it, or even set it down for a minute and you will have a DI or platoon sergeant up your ass in a heartbeat.

You are required to train and re-qualify every year, even when you are not in immediate danger of going into combat. The training never ceases.

However, when a Marine is stateside - not in a war zone or on the training range - their weapons are kept - not in their barracks - but in an armory. No Marine carries a weapon, nor has immediate access to a weapon, while on a U.S. military base outside a war zone.  Only those whose job it is to carry a weapon (such as MPs) have immediate access.

Now, you would think that men and women that were trained firearms experts would be able to exercise their second amendment rights. Nope. Not even the best are allowed to carry any firearm on a US Base. Period. Marine generals are smart enough to know an angry Marine is dangerous enough without a weapon. 

This brings me back to the NRA and the ongoing issue with school shootings in particular, and gun violence in general, in America.

It is simply unconscionable to me how we will not allow anyone to drive a vehicle on public roads without extensive training and testing, but any fool can have a gun - whether or not they have a clue what it's for or how it's used.

Unlike a driver’s license, where each of my children had several months of 'Drivers Ed' and several written tests, gun ownership is uncontrolled. My kids spent countless hours with family members learning to drive (and ruining at least one standard clutch). Finally, they took a written test, a driving test (maybe more than one) and got their driver’s license. A license they have to renew every few years.

That means they can now hop in dad's car; drive to the gun show and buy a shinny AR-15 (ammo included) with which to impress their friends when they get drunk next Saturday night.

The fact that the NRA has no problem with the rigor needed to get a driver's license, but they have all sorts of problems with licensing gun owners, is proof positive they are right. Guns don't kill people. The NRA kills people.

As weapons get more sophisticated and dangerous, extensive training and education (and reasonable limits on capacity and capability) are the only thing that will keep the 2nd amendment in place. The longer the NRA ignores its duty to allow regulation, training, testing and licensing of gun ownership - the more certain the 2nd amendment will, one day, be repealed.

JWB

Update Jan 2020: The Marine Corps announced that all who posses a Law Enforcement (LE) rating may carry concealed handguns (not assault weapons) on Marine Corps bases. https://www.marines.mil/News/Messages/Messages-Display/Article/2048873/concealed-carry-of-privately-owned-firearms-for-us-marine-corps-law-enforcement/

Life’s Rights

I’m a bastard. Literally.

In rural Indiana in the summer of 1946 a thirty-three year old married housewife and mother of two had an affair. Lonely and ignored for the prior 10 years she toiled daily to make a home for her two teenage children and have dinner on the table every night for a neglectful cheating husband. They had not been intimate for a decade. But then it was 1946. It was not a situation where a woman had many options.

In the fall of that year, the housewife had an affair. She soon found herself pregnant. She cried daily for a month. Told no one. The father of the unborn child was also married. A home delivery worker and the father of two girls. Good looking. Charismatic. 

The woman, all of 98 pounds, knew this ‘secret’ would not be a secret much longer. She had to tell someone soon. She cried.

Six weeks into her pregnancy she told the father. He was devastated.  He could not leave his wife and children. He thought he knew where she could get an abortion. He would help pay for it. 

The housewife, raised Catholic, had wandered from the church long ago. But some of those teachings remain like ghosts in your conscience.  She decided to tell her husband.

The husband went into a rage. He threw the woman out of his home. She barely had time to pack. She spent the night in a seedy motel.

A week passed then another. The father helped the woman with small amounts of money.  Her seventeen year old son brought groceries when he could sneak them out. She looked for a job. No one would hire a pregnant woman in her 30's. 

Several weeks had past when the husband came to her. The house was a mess. He had not had a good meal in weeks. The kids were solemn and distant. No one had clean clothes. He needed her back. All would be forgiven if she got an abortion. Although illegal in Indiana, they were not hard to come by. He would pay for it. Nobody had to know. She could come home.

The woman spent that night crying again; her biggest sorrow being her two children, now without a mother at home.  She went to a pay phone and called the husband. She would have the baby. It was up to him if she could come home. He said ‘never’ and hung up. They did not speak again for 12 years.

The father, to his credit, continued to assist with meager funds. But he was not going to acknowledge the child. The woman worked part time for a house cleaning service until she could not. She and the father drifted apart before she gave birth at 2:00am on May 24, 1947. The boy born that day is writing this post.

<><><> 

I consider myself a progressive. Fiscally conservative. An atheist/humanist. In theory I support a woman’s right to choose. In practice, I may owe my life to the teachings of the Catholic Church.

I think about it often. I now have three children and a grandchild. Only one of which my mother ever met before her early death from lung cancer. I think about my mother’s choice and wonder if I support the fact that, under current law, she could have legally chose to abort.

I have come to peace with my support of a woman’s right to choose. While I reel at the thought of being ‘canceled’ before I was ever born, I must ask myself: Would I have wanted my mother to make her decision to have me based on her faith and convictions - her love for me – or would I rather the government tell her she must?

Does the fact that she did have a choice make my life any more valuable? No. Of course not. But it puts my life in context. In perspective. No one can argue the impact a loving mother has on her children. I experienced a love that came through sacrifice and pain that many women have had to cope with. Her love was unconditional.

I will never let anyone forget I was a choice.

JWB

America - Heal Thyself

The U.S. Constitution puts forth the proposition that we are all entitled to ‘Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’.  When Thomas Jefferson first wrote those words in 1776 such a thought was so progressive and astonishing that it is said the King of England laughed when he read it.

The thought that someone has the ‘right’ to be happy? Come on. Really?

Yea. Really.

Since its inception the Constitution of the United States of America has been a model of progressive ideals. I find humor in the fact that so many conservative politicians identify with “The Founding Fathers” ideals. Most of them are not even close.

Besides the rule of law, a free press and our democratic institutions, the Constitution affords us unalienable rights to Life and Happiness. If adequate and equal healthcare does not fall in that definition, then nothing does.  Life is dependent on heath.  As my grandfather used to say: “You are nothing without your health!”   

I have no magic bullet for universal healthcare in this country. Obama came close – but penalties for not insuring yourself? Really? Every time we use tax laws and bureaucratic triangulation to solve our problems, we are bound to fall short of expectations.

Medicare for all might work – but its expense could be crippling – even for the wealthiest country in the world. Not to mention it results in de facto nationalization of insurance companies.  

Free enterprise and competition has always been a pathway to the best possible products at the lowest possible costs. Only when the government steps in with laws and regulations that stifle competition do we falter; like giving drug companies exclusive patent rights to life saving drugs – then they price gouge patients and insurance companies because they have no competition.  

One of the most egregious parts of Obamacare was the limits on profits that insurance companies could claim.  A certain percentage of all premiums paid had to go directly to claims. This may sound good on the surface, but it is socialistic as hell. Regulation is one thing – control is something else altogether. Controlling business and markets has always had unintended consequences. 

The same was true with the Obamacare provisions that taxed people who choose not to have insurance. This too was very socialist in nature and not at all what I would call 'progressive'. 

Obamacare was progressive in respect to eliminating eligibility requirements for hi-risk individuals and those with prior or existing conditions.  But it did little to promote good health or lower drug costs. 

Rather than managing healthcare with individual taxes, market regulations and price controls, maybe we need to take the gloves off altogether.   

Make insurance companies compete and give them tax incentives to be the lowest cost, highest quality providers under a progressive federal plan. Eliminate drug patent protection for any drug costing more than $100 a dose.  Make all states allow and honor policies from insurance companies registered with the federal plan.  

I'm sure there are a dozen more things we can do to give incentives to private insurance companies to adopt the McD volume model (McDonald's found they would rather make .50 cents a piece on a million burgers, than two dollars a piece on a thousand).  The secret is accessible quality - in volume.  The internet is an excellent framework to make this possible for health insurance.

We are smart enough to make something work. I just know it.

JWB

45 & The Rule of Law

We live in a time in which America is changing before our eyes. I am 'typically' a conservative at heart. But as I write this, a sitting U.S. President (#45) acts as much an adolescent as my seventeen year old and offers obnoxious rhetoric daily - and many of my friends and family love him.   

The President is Donald Trump and the time is 2019. Contrary to the belief of many pundits, I believe Trump is not the reason for the change. He is the result of what has not changed.

Those that gravitate to this man’s inept behavior are not ignorant backwoods yokels or inbred losers. They make up 50% of voting Americans. They are lawmakers, first responders, doctors, lawyers, CEOs, professionals, retirees,....

Within my family Trump supporters are ninety percent college graduates. Several are millionaires a few times over. All are religious - or at least profess to be. They send their children to religious colleges and preach their philosophy to them. Their discourse cloaked in abstracts, they swear (on a bible of course) that they are not bigots or racist “...In any way”. "Not a racist bone in my body..." - a sure testament to bigotry.

They used to live in a social closet where they consorted with only like-minded ‘friends’. They ‘understand’ why Nazi’s and white nationalists exist. Welfare is a four letter word. All taxes are liberal waste. Climate change is natural. They are Trump zealots. To them Trump is the white right’s counter to Obama and everything he stood for. The closet is open.

At this writing, Trump is becoming so bold as to think he is a dictator of sorts. So deep and aggressive is his support within the alt-right he appears to be trying to invite impeachment.  Through not so subtle references and innuendo - if he is impeached or voted out of office - he is sowing seeds of discontent and even possible armed conflict. And he just might be able to pull it off, if my family and friends are any indication.

So how did a country of progressives (the entire American system of government was very progressive for its time 250 years ago) enter into an era teetering on the edge of chaos? The answer is as simple as its rise is complex: Social media.

Social media did not create anti-progressive leanings or bigotry or bias. It simply enables what was once marginalized to enter the mainstream. Social media has all but replaced legacy progressive media. 

During its rise, the secret to getting attention in this new medium was to be anti-progressive and anti-establishment. This trend was very evident to several traditional media outlets that realized the time was right to make lots of money from, and obtain a position of power with, those on the fringe. A leader among these was Fox News. They were certainly not alone. There were many purveyors of white right bias and nationalism long before Fox News found the pliable Mr. Trump.

Fox News’ opposition to Obama due to his race and namesake was obvious and palpable during his presidency. That made them stand out. Exactly what they wanted. Apparently, the thought process was that progressive government was going to kill the America that was built by, well, former progressives.  While the rationale seems a bit sketchy - the results were not. 

The popularity of releasing the pent up self-importance of the white right went viral. Numerous conspiracy and alt-right social media outlets prevailed and they fed off each other. The outbreak became a feeding frenzy of self interest - and popularity. Facts be damned. It was making many people powerful and popular - people that would never have been heard of otherwise. Under pressure from friends and family many whites that were on the moderate fence fell to the right.

<><><> 

Many believe the cornerstone of the American system of democracy is the right to vote. While the most visible right we enjoy, it is not the cornerstone. The cornerstone of our unique America is, and shall always be, our Rule of Law.  

The phrase ‘Rule of Law’ is steeped in mystery to many. It has not always lived up to its promise. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are the mouthpiece for the Rule of Law. The Constitution is supposed to guarantee a balance of power, free press, no religious bias, equality under the law, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  All of which was as progressive as you could get back in 1776 - as it still is in much of today’s world.

When conservatives cite what the founding fathers intended, they often pervert the truth. What they intended was a progressive nation that could move forward through any obstacle, threat or injustice. The promise of the Rule of Law was not a guarantee; it’s simply a tool kit. How we use it is up to us.

The alt-right led by Trump is threatening the Rule of Law in a manner which has not been seen since the days of Joe McCarthy.  It would not have been possible without social media.

Nothing about our unique and progressive constitution or the Rule of Law stands in the way of social media. Lies, fabrications, fake conspiracies and otherwise ‘fake news’ abounds.  Enemies of the Rule of Law and our progressive form of government (both foreign and domestic) have learned to use this new tool effectively. They call truth lies, and lies truth. Where the thoughtful and reasonable person reads an obviously fabricated story and laughs, half of America finds a call to arms - their bias reinforced.  It’s scary.

So what to do?  How do we keep one of the most popular, important social inventions of our time healthy?  How can we insure reality and truth are protected in social media discourse - while protecting freedom of speech, opinion and dissent?

The 2020 presidential campaign may end up being the biggest test yet for the progressive experiment that is America. If it goes the way it might – it could put our nation’s vulnerable social fabric on life support.

The solution does not - and cannot - rely on government.  A complete solution does not exist. However a big step may lie with the press itself. It's my belief we need an independent better business bureau of news publishers. A place where any story or theory can be tested; verified; Given a weighted score of accuracy and fact:  Clearly marked fact, fiction or opinion. And it needs to be paid for by - and staffed from - leading media outlets - printed and electronic. All of them. If a ‘source of truth’ is not a member of the bureau, you need to take the information with a grain of salt. This needs to be advertised and marketed aggressively..

There are online ‘Fact Checking’ resources available today. But most of them are aligned with legacy progressive media or publications. That makes many call into question the facts presented.  More to the point - fact checking sources are not as accessible as the social media trolls. Real facts are not often advertised as 'news'. So if you are like 80% of America that gets information pushed to them - they never see the facts unless they pull them from another source. 

The key to making an independent fact bureau work is for all major media outlets to subscribe and give carte blanche to the bureau to review any story or article published regardless of sources, copywrites, etc.. Members must provide support for, and links to, the bureau website in all their publications and broadcasts.

Would an independent fact bureau be difficult to establish? Oh yes. Competitive? Combative? Controversial? Hell yes. But - a poison and false social media will slowly crumble our society and its institutions. And the first to fall will be the fifth estate. They need to be the first to fight in this conflict.

Have a better idea? Let me know.

JWB

And yes, I have a seventeen year old. Don’t ask.

Step 5: Give Me Your Weak

I am not a descendant of Native Americans; as is the case with 95% of all citizens of the U.S.. However, studies have shown that the majority of the population of Central and South America are descendants of aboriginal populations. Thus, in genealogical terms, U.S. citizens are, by and large, foreigners. And so called illegal aliens from South America are anything but.

Perspective is the natural enemy of hypocrisy. 

Part of the perspective we need to bring to the immigration debate is what many have labeled the ‘Gumball’ debate. Made popular nearly 10 years ago (well before the current crisis began) this video and subsequent ones by Roy Beck, have postulated the reason for our immigration problem is congress and a hypothetical ‘limit’ that they can place on legal immigration that would solve the crisis.

While Beck’s solutions were not an answer – his numbers were spot on. As a matter of fact – immigration rates since the video first aired have actually been higher than he projected.

The other perspective is that 10 years ago people like Beck (as offered in his video) viewed Mexico as one of the greatest immigration threats. That was false.

Due to improvements in the standard of living in Mexico (due mostly to NAFTA’s elimination of tariffs and trade restrictions – circa 1993)[1], a very small number of the current immigrant population is coming from Mexico.  As a matter of fact, the latest US census indicated that the growth in Mexican immigrant population in the U.S. (both new immigrants and their offspring) from 1990 to 2017 declined by nearly half a million individuals[2]. Yes. That's not a misprint. More people of Mexican descent left the U.S. than entered.

However immigration from South America, Central America and the Middle East has skyrocketed. These perspectives show us – in no uncertain terms – how to fix the immigration woes in the U.S.  

I am not a champion of Roy Beck’s political solution scenarios (like ending DACA).   But one thing he mentions time and again is that the ultimate solution will be to invest in the stability and prosperity of what is unceremoniously called the ‘Third World’.  We need to address the economic and social strife in these countries – because if we do not, we are practically speaking, just asking the downtrodden to escape to the U.S.

By backing dictators and turning a blind eye to American business interests that siphon billions each year from these small economies, we exacerbate the problems. We are causing our own ‘crisis’. Since 1990 asylum seekers, mostly from latin America are "Coming to America" in droves.

An observation often attributed to Albert Einstein, “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.” – can be applied liberally to this problem.

Several times over we have seen how economic and social engagement changes the course of history.  From the Soviet Union and Glasnost, to NAFTA, economic and social engagement by the richest nation in the world can have tremendous impact.

In the example of Mexico, even with their continued social problems with gangs, drug cartels and official corruption, they have ceased becoming an immigration threat; due primarily to leveling the economic playing field.

With the billions in foreign aid and American business investment that this country can bring to bear - it's unconscionable that any country in the America's is not a healthy democracy.

Our invasion of Iraq brought about ISIS and a flood of refugees that persists today. Our support of dictators in Central and South America cause thousands to flee each year. 

Will we never learn? 

JWB

Sources:

[1]NAFTA, Overview and dates of signatures and ratification, Economic facts, Office of US Trade Representative

[2]2017 Immigration stats (incl Mexican decline) Center for Immigration Studies.