Bernie Sanders Just Stabbed Us In The Back And Screwed Us As A Result by Rev. J.T. Smith

Bernie Sanders had been running a campaign that fought for We The People over the wealthy and corporations, that was consistently against the forever wars, and recognized how much the inequality in America has hurt us all.

#NotMeUs.  Ha!  Us are boned now, thank you very much.

Sanders and Warren were the ONLY  true Progressive candidates to run.  My hope had been that Warren and Bernie would run together.

Now?

Bernie has bowed out of the run for the nomination.  He says he'll keep fighting the fight, but  he just gave up his best potential avenue to fight for us: As the President.

If you believe that the only viable political parties are Democrats and Republicans, the Bernie has just screwed us!  Our options are a bigot Republican and a bigot corporate Democrat.  I seriously do not see a whole lot of difference here.  While I grant that Biden is somewhat saner than Trump. the end result is still the same: The wealthy are still going to be in charge and the wars are going to keep on going until a real leader steps up and is put in office!

I had believed that leader to be Bernie Sanders.  Clearly, I was in error.

Gee, thanks, Bernie! 

by Rev. J.T. Smith

Major Problem With The Coronavirus Reporting by Rev. J.T. Smith

While there is no question that the COVID-19 coronavirus is a serious issue, the media have been exaggerating the problem.  Suspicion is not knowledge, and a presumptive case is not a confirmed case.

In Pennsylvania as of March 14, 2020, there are reported to be 41 cases of COVID-19, 35 presumptive positive cases and six confirmed. That is bad reporting as suspicion, regardless of the probability of accuracy, is still not knowledge.  Presumption is based on probability, and while something has a high probability of being the case it would be far better to stick with reporting only the confirmed cases.

Not only that, but pushing hand sanitizer, which while being antibacterial isn't effective against viral infections, is nothing more than a placebo that in the long run helps to create the superbugs that resist antibiotics due to overuse.

Obviously freedom of the press is important, and I am not suggesting otherwise; but, the government's reporting presumptive cases as actual cases is only serving to foment fear and panic.

What's more is the fact that the massive quarantine was never put in place to combat a frankly bigger threat to human health, even with the vaccine that's relatively readily available,  that has been well known for a long time now: Influenza.  Then again, humans panic so easily when confronted with a new unknown.

And while I am not prone to conspiracy theories in general, I have noticed that the quarantine measures now in place handily circumvent the First Amendment's protections ["Congress shall make no law respecting . . . the right of the people peaceably to assemble"] and quash the myriad protests (e.g. protests against any/all of Trump's scandals, protests against the police, et al) that have been taking in America for the last three years and more.

The COVID-19 coronavirus issue has been blown vastly out of proportion in this country, allowing fear to take over from rational thought from the public and harming more people than merely those even potentially at risk from this virus.

Either way, it does help to show how much better Bernie Sanders' Medicare For All would be than what's currently available; but while Sanders' Medicare For All would help the medical system issues under the circumstances, it still leaves hourly workers, the unemployed, and small business owners high and dry if this situation lasts for too much longer.

- Rev. J.T. Smith

Daylight Saving Time by Rev. J.T. Smith

Once again we've gone through the twice-a-year time warp from the clocks throughout most of America being moved ahead an hour.  And once again there are numerous people complaining about the inconvenience.

Naturally, there's an accompanying push-back due to that inconvenience where people want only one time-set.  Truth be told,  I also wish the ritual was finally done away with; however, I disagree with anyone and everyone who wants to eliminate Daylight Savings Time [DST].  Their reasoning is that they don't want to lose that hour of sleep when the clocks jump forward, nor do they want to lose the extra hour of sleep when the clocks fall back.

Admittedly, I can empathize with that line of reasoning, but it's frankly shortsighted.

My preference, along with the preference of Benjamin Franklin, who initiated the concept of daylight savings time, would be to simply remain switched to daylight savings time.  Even with it being darker in the morning during DST.

Granted, if we followed the example of pre-Columbian Native Americans, then we might be happier in general as they never centered their lives around a mechanical device meant to measure the position of the Earth in relation to its relative position on its axis in relation to the sun.

But since we're so programmed to measure every second at a minimum, then I've always concluded that DST is preferable by far.  Ultimately, the length of time the sun shines in comparison to daylight and night time never actually changes, only our perception of it does.

- Rev. J.T. Smith

2020 United States Presidential Election, My Choice by Rev. J.T. Smith

There is no perfect candidate for President.  Ever.  This is simply because perfection, aside from God, is purely subjective.

Of course, there will always be candidates that are better than others.  In 2016, I supported Bernie Sanders in the primary and hated the way the D.N.C. blew him off as viable candidate even though he was able to consistently draw more people to his rallies than any other candidate.  Go figure.

In 2016, I ultimately voted for Jill Stein because I couldn't in good conscience vote for Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump [see It's Neither A Spoiler Nor A Protest Vote! by Rev. J.T. Smith for full account of exactly why] as she was the best available candidate.

Once again, Bernie is running for President, and he is once again my choice for President.  My reasoning is thus: Bernie Sanders has been leading the fight since well before the 2016 elections, including steadfastly and consistently fighting for We The People and against the corruption and warmongering so prevalent in government.  And he's also the first to propose Medicare For All, which eliminates all deductibles and co-pays with the exception of elective non- medically procedures.  No one is perfect, but he's the best choice of candidate.

Voting for a person strictly because of their gender or sexuality is a mistake.  Yes, it is long past time for a woman or a member of the LGBT+ community to become president, there is no question of that; but as with any position of authority, it needs to be the right person, regardless of gender or sexuality, to be voted into power.  
While I find it commendable that Pete Buttigieg is open about his sexual orientation while running for President, I cannot vote for him simply because he's a corporate Democrat.  And corporate Democrats, which are nearly as bad as the Republicans currently in power are among the last things Americans need voted into office.
I cannot vote for Amy Klobuchar for simple reason she's effectively Hillary Clinton lite.  Still a corporate Democrat, even if not quite as deep into the pockets of Wall Street.

Tom Steyer, like Mike Bloomberg, is yet another billionaire running for President, and America definitely never needs another billionaire as president.  And like Steyer and Bloomberg, Joe Biden is yet another corporate Democrat.

To make it worse, Biden and Bloomberg are also notorious bigots.  And while Tulsi Gabbard seems to barely register in the polls compared to the others who're still running, I do like that she's Hindu and running against the endless wars, but she also has a history of bigotry and troubling past actions in terms of her foreign policy positions solidly working against her.

The only major issue I have with Warren is her relative inexperience compared to Sanders.

Frankly, my current dream ticket is Sanders/Warren with Sanders as president for eight years followed by Warren for the following eight years.  Though I would accept Warren as President with Sanders as VP for the same eight years followed by Sanders as President for eight years.

Ultimately, I am still not a liberal Democrat, I'm a progressive independent; and if a superior third-party contender runs for President, then I'll vote for them.  At present, that doesn't seem likely regardless of the party.

- Rev. J.T. Smith

Trust, Respect . . . And Beauty by Rev. J.T. Smith

Trust, Respect . . . And Beauty

Both trust and respect should always be earned rather than treated as some form of a door prize to be handed out to anyone who shows up or just happens to be in any kind of position of authority (e.g. parents/elders, teachers, the police/military personnel, any part of the government, the media, et al).  And just as actions speak louder than words, albeit not as often, a person's actions are the best and surest method of determining whether or not they deserve your trust or respect, if ever.  Neither trust nor respect should ever be treated as absolutes unless they have earned either of those; and if anyone should ever abuse you personally or their position of power in general, then that trust and/or respect should be revoked.

In reality, the word "respect" gets thrown around far too readily and nearly everyone seems to demand it these days.  We're told that everyone deserves respect at all times.  The fact is that people erroneously use the term "respect" when they should be using the phrase "common courtesy."  In his article "Command, Don't Demand Respect: Giving Respect Without Feeling It Inside Is Pretentious. Insisting On Such Respect Is False Pride," Manoj Khatri said: "All around us, we see people demanding/giving respect for all the wrong reasons.  In your family, respect your elders whether or not they deserve it.  At school/college, respect your teachers, doesn't matter if they can't teach anything.  At work, respect your seniors, regardless of how competent they are."

As stated earlier, respect, like trust, needs to be earned rather than simply given or expected.  While it has been said that respect is neither imposed nor begged, it's earned and offered, it has also been rightly observed that if you have to demand respect then you don't deserve it.  Even though at the end of the day you will never get to determine or decide how or when, if ever, anyone respects or trusts you, it is you who should be the one to decide who you respect and/or trust and by what individual criteria you use to determine who, when, and how anyone earns either from you.  And we should all be working to earn that trust or respect if we desire it from others.

Bear in mind also that trust and respect are not mutually inclusive.  While you can trust that a peer may do their duties to the best of their ability, it doesn't automatically mean that you do or should respect them as their other actions towards you or others might not warrant it.  Conversely, while you obviously won't trust an enemy, you might still respect them for their cunning, skill, or some other attribute that you find worthy of respect.

How does the concept of beauty fit into all of this?  We're essentially told by the media who we should find beautiful or that somehow beauty is a valid method for automatic judgment of a person.  The reality is that beauty is simply a combination of qualities (e.g. shape, colour, or form) that pleases the aesthetic senses, especially sight.  Sadly, the media (which in terms of determining "beauty" seems to be the accepted "authority" on the subject, an authority it doesn't deserve in reality as beauty is a subjective matter of opinion and we should be capable of making up our own minds based on our own individual aesthetic) continually focuses myopically on women's appearance while focusing on nearly every other attribute of men.  While the apparent majority of media will do this, it doesn't mean that everyone does. 

Since a person's physical appearance is the first thing we see when we look at a person and quite often it's the only part of a person we will ever be able to "interact" with on any level, particularly in terms of celebrities, we'll often say (even if only in our own minds) or post online "so-and-so is beautiful/sexy/pretty/hot/etc." when we see someone whose features or attributes fit within our personal aesthetic; and that action may seem shallow to others observing.  Of course, some people are simply that shallow.  Mind you, those statements aren't limited solely to stated observations by males. 

But that physical appearance neither determines nor denotes either intelligence or personality.  How can anyone ascertain another person's intelligence unless we're able to interact, most often talk, with them?  At that we usually base our conclusions about a person's intelligence far more on the way that person speaks rather than on how they look.  As for personality, once we encounter it, it will for many of us adjust how we see that person, either augmenting or diminishing their "beauty" in our eyes. 

Whereas we have to earn the respect and trust of others, we cannot earn beauty.  That said, like trust and respect, no one else can decide or determine for us who or what we find beautiful.  And though we have the absolute right to think of ourselves as beautiful in whatever form or capacity, and we should never let others determine how we perceive ourselves, we simply can't force or expect others to agree with our sense of aesthetic.  Beauty is an opinion, but it is our own opinion.

by Rev. J.T. Smith