I'm Already Better Than Trump And So Are You - Control Over My Feelings Doesn't Equate His Spiritual Growth, Undo His Harm, Or Bring Back the Dead

 "If you wish ill on Trump now that he has coronavirus, you're no better than he is." 

I am a proponent of love and compassion and interconnectedness and so much "liberal snowflake, socialist, hippy-dippy-ness", but let me tell you why the above statement irks me. 

1. This is a demand that I feel a certain way, or that my emotions are not valid. 
2. This expects me to look past the havoc that he has caused and wish him things he refused other people.
3. This somehow supposes that if we give him compassion, he'll change his ways and become better by our example. 
4. Our "respectability politics" do NOT bring about justice or hold him accountable for his actions.
5. I AM better than him, and you most likely are too. Here are a few reasons why, in no particular order.
1. Have you ever created a fake university to swindle people out of money?
2. Have you paid for billboards calling for the death of innocent black teenagers?
3. Have you ever skipped out on paying taxes but ascended to the highest office where taxpayers pay for your housing, meals, health care, transportation, protection, golf trips, your EVERYTHING?
4. Have you raped children at parties that supported sex trafficking and sex trafficking of minors?
5. Have you raped or sexually assaulted women? Have you bragged about it?
6. Have you enacted/maintained policies that imprison legally-asylum-seeking migrants, denying them of basic human rights, health care, legal rights, causing some to die, be sexually assaulted or have sterilization operations on their reproductive organs without their knowledge/consent aka have you approved acts of genocide?
7. Have you engaged in acts of warfare or commanded the use of weapons, bombs, drone-bombs etc to kill/maim other people?
8. Have you lied 20,000+ times while President?
9. Have you encouraged hate, fear-mongering and divisiveness?
10. Have you been unable to condemn white supremacy?
11. Have you unfairly appointed unworthy financial donors or family members to positions of power that are a conflict of interest to the office and the American people?
12. Have you mocked or refused a simple scientific concept of facial covering that could have saved lives or saved people from illness at the very least, including everyone in contact with you?
13. Have you mocked disabled people, captured soldiers, dead soldiers and their families, created schoolyard-bully level nicknames for your political opponents, been a general asshole?
14. Have you cheated on multiple wives, sometimes while they were pregnant with your offspring? (That might hit home for some people...)
15. Have you [insert any of Trump's known wrongdoing's here]?
16. Have you [insert any of Trump's unknown wrongdoings here]?

The frustration I feel with being told that I am required to feel or behave a certain way is directly related to the understanding that Trump HAS NOT faced justice for any of the above actions and he WILL NOT face justice as we know it on this earth before he dies. 

The suffering he has caused others sits there in the swamp of his life, festering and emboldening his supporters who see that the rich, white/orange man can be as corrupt as hell because 

1. he has lawyers/wealth/fame/whiteness
2. his opponents are too worried about being "respectable" and "nice" and "not speaking ill of the ill".

Trumpers want that immunity too and act is if by supporting him, some of that will rub off on them, allowing them to get away with the awful things some of them do.... lynching, shooting, assaulting, harassing non-Trump supporters, corrupting and deforming the law, corrupt policing, corrupting the legal system in general. 

Yes, we are ALL CONNECTED. Yes, what we do and say affects other people. But I do not have to mentally or emotionally protect a man and his ilk that support the murder and destruction of their opponents and other people. I know that has a bearing on my own spiritual growth, but if that's the most hurt I cause, I can deal with that. They are playing a different game, using different philosophies and my sympathy or 'holy/enlightened outlook' would not change that.

I cannot forget so quickly what he has done. I cannot just put my hands together in prayer for someone who has an ego so large, it's a wonder the planet doesn't plummet through the solar system at the weight of it. 

When some people are wishing him ill, or aren't saddened or concerned for him, they are likely 

1. responding to the knowledge that justice fails us, 
2. aware that even if he suffers for this illness, he won't have even experienced a modicum of the pain he has caused others, 
3. aware that he had full knowledge and didn't act on it to help the people of this country.
4. aware he won't change.
5. aware there is more to this existence than him.

Trump doesn't give a shit about any of us, and if you haven't figured it out, he never will. Seventy-four years on this planet and he has never reached a spiritual level of giving a shit about anyone outside of how they can help him. Even if you sat him in a room with the highest spiritual gurus for a month, he would likely be unable to step outside of himself for a moment to comprehend what they say. 

He is the sludge in the hierarchy of spiritual development and we have all enabled that. Every person that didn't hold him accountable from birth to now, every person that was paid off, every person that shrugged it off has something to do with his ascension and our own demise as people. 

I understand the calling to a higher spiritual level when it comes to how we treat those in opposition but be honest: HE DOESN'T CARE AND HE ISN'T PLAYING THAT GAME WITH YOU.

Despite that awful truth, do the goodness in the world where you can. Allow yourself to grow and enhance your outlook. Work lovingly with others when you can. And know that my thoughts about that man is NOT your adversary to a better world with higher standards. He is. I'm not wasting my energy on giving him good vibes. I have better shit to do with my energy than focus on someone who doesn't care if I die. (Despite the time spent on my lengthy rant here.)

And unless he accomplishes that .00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% freakish possibility of spiritual growth and acceptance of responsibility for his actions, I will hold him accountable for his actions and I will hold the justice system accountable for doing their job, knowing they won't and I'll be working for MY version of this world that doesn't permit people like him to do what they do, nor water it down with unwarranted compassion at his inevitable illness. 

So, I'm gonna feel how I'm gonna feel, because the destruction he's caused is real. But he is not my world. He is a barrier to it. He is someone I won't reach and I'm not gonna try. I have more chance of encouraging humanity in the people in my small town flying Trump flags. Yet that's not my aim either. I'm not holding my breath. I'm just living my life, keeping to myself for safety, hoping to support those whose lives are threatened by Trump and his "patriots".

People say they are sick of "politics". Politics is an aspect of how we interact with each other and create and maintain systems of power or progress. Politics is when we either let the corrupt elite get what they want or call out the systems of injustice, so if you're sick of "politics", you may be sick of hearing about injustices you don't think affect you. But it does, because we're all interconnected. So, unless real change happens and people help other people knowing they help themselves, politics isn't going away. I just don't mind if Trump does. Trump and all he stands for can exit and never come back. THAT is the end result aim of spiritual enlightenment that we so badly want. And HOW that happens, whether through succumbing to illness, or death we all meet someday, or mass spiritual enlightenment of him and his ilk, that's not up to me. 

What IS up to me, is how I deal with my feelings and how I work for what I want. So, no, I won't be sidelined by "being respectable" when his atrocious life's work has not changed because he caught an illness he ridiculed. I'd rather be responsible for disgust at a person who's done what he has, than be responsible for what he's done. 

I don't envy him. I don't support him. I don't want him or want he represents in this world to have the power it does. And I don't think you do either. And you know my disgust with him is NOT worse than what he's done. You just acknowledge you can reach my humanity easier than you can his. And THAT'S why you plead for me to be "better than they are". You/we want any bit of control over this crazy world that we can muster. Well, I already know I am better than he is, and that you most probably are too. Our "being better" doesn't change who he is and it doesn't bring him to justice and it doesn't bring back the dead and undo the hurt he caused. 

So, yeah. That's enough of that.

Not Saying the Pledge of Allegiance in Nebraska Schools Should Not Be a Reason to Shut Down Schools

Here I sit on a Tuesday evening with several webpages open so I can write an intelligent entry; some of the webpages are: ACLU of Nebraska, Rule 10 for the Accreditation of Nebraska Schools, and a Wikipedia article on the Pledge of Allegiance.

Earlier this month, I had read an article that said Nebraska schools would be required to daily say the Pledge of Allegiance or the school would risk losing accreditation and be shut down.

The Pledge

Thanks to Wiki, I am able to see the development of a pledge first written by a "Christian socialist" in 1892.

Bellamy's original Pledge read as follows:^[7]

I pledge allegiance to my flag and the republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Also of note:

The Pledge of Allegiance... [was] formally adopted by Congress as the pledge in 1942.^[1] The Pledge has been modified four times since its composition, with the most recent change adding the words "under God" in 1954.

  For those of you who need a brush-up, the current accepted Pledge is as such:

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Constitutional Rights

As a result of much legislation and many battles "the Supreme Court has ruled on several occasions that students cannot be compelled to recite the Pledge, or punished for not doing so." The ACLU has reminded administrators that this Constitutional Right to refrain without punishment also extends to teachers.

ACLU Call to Action

This morning I received an email from the ACLU (sent yesterday) that requested I sent a message to Dr. Roger Breed, the Education Commissioner and implore him to "Defend the religious & speech rights of teachers".

My message to Dr. Roger Breed

Note: The first paragraph is automatically included by the ACLU.

Roger Breed:

Teachers shouldn't have to fear their jobs are in jeopardy if they are true to their religious and political conscience. Students shouldn't fear harassment as part of their school day. The new Pledge regulations may not compel participation, but the new mandatory Pledge may put pressure on those who cannot participate.

The recitation of the Pledge is not necessary to the education of children and it should not be a key component in the retention of school funding.
One must consider the effects of requiring people, (students and teachers) who come from many backgrounds and religions, to either recite or stand by as a pledge is said to a flag and a specific God.

If funding should rely on anything, it should not be the inclusion of words recited daily, but on the basis of the quality of education.

I strongly urge you to focus in the future on passing regulations that improve educating our youth rather than indoctrinating them. If you want students and teachers to be proud of their country, well, it takes a lot more than reciting words that can be hollow to those who are forced to listen to it daily.

As a young person who has traveled to and spent time in six other countries, I find blind indoctrination and the 'love your country'
mentality detrimental to proper international relations. I would be much more proud of my state and my country if the emphasis for school funding was put, not on a pledge forced into classrooms, but on the improved quality of education. I urge you to withdraw the non-education based funding requirement so that the focus is, not on who did not recite the pledge every day, but on the subjects being taught in schools.

Response of Dr. Roger Breed (which includes the Proposed Requirement)

Thank you for your email concerning the proposed pledge recitation requirement in Rule 10.  Please know that the proposed requirement states:

003.12    Each public school district shall require each such district's schools
to establish a period of time during the school day, when a majority of pupils is scheduled to be present, during which pupils will be led in the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in the presence of the flag of the United States of America, in grades Kindergarten through twelve. 
Pupil participation in the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance shall be voluntary.  Pupils not participating in the recitation of the Pledge shall be permitted to silently stand or remain seated but shall be required to respect the rights of those pupils electing to participate.

The proposed requirement has been approved by the State Board of Education and sent to the Attorney General.  If the Attorney General approves the proposed rule and if the Governor signs the proposed rule, then the recitation requirement will become effective for Nebraska's accredited public schools.

We will forward your comments to State Board of Education.  Again, thank you for your comments.

Roger Breed
Commissioner of Education

 Proposed Requirement in Correlation to Rule 10 Accreditation

If you will notice, the proposed requirement is listed as 3.12. The most recent Rule 10 pdf (of 177 pages in length) has yet to include this rule, as it needs to be signed into law by the Nebraska Attorney General. Requirement 003.12 would be subject to Clause 003:

"Mandatory Requirements for Legal Operation. To be eligible for accreditation or to continue as an accredited school system, the following requirements shall be met when applicable. Failure to comply with Sections 003.01 through 003.11 shall be just cause for the Commissioner to initiate proceedings before the Board to terminate accreditation and end legal operation during the school year.

The clauses 003.01-003.11 seem legitimate to the facilitation of schools, as they regulate subject matter, teacher and administer certification, class credits, length of school year, reports etc.

Why is the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance so Important that it's worth shutting down schools?

That's kind of a rhetorical question. NOT saying the pledge does not mean the students are lacking in a well-rounded education. What does the requirement hope to accomplish? Patriotism? I know that when people tell me I am required to do something, I do it likely out of obligation, not choice. Wouldn't it be more of a learning opportunity if it was built into lesson planning?

I know I have a different outlook at patriotism than many other people and of course I object to the inclusion of 'under God' as part of a Government Pledge. Wiki says: "Congressional sessions open with the recital of the Pledge, as do government meetings at local levels, and meetings held by many private organizations." Maybe 58 years of saying 'Under God' has misled our politicians into believing Religion and State ARE intertwined, which would shed light as to why Republicans are the Religious Party, creating platforms based on a Christian teaching of abortion, instead of seeing reality (see my previous rant).

But the most important thing to this requirement is not about my belief about an added clause, nor the educational inspiration of patriotism among students: I do not believe that the daily recitation of the pledge is of enough importance to education that failure to do so is cause to terminate school accreditation and operation. 

Call to Action

If you take issue with this proposed requirement:
1) fill out this ACLU plea that goes to Commissioner of Education, Dr. Roger Breed, who will send your comments along.
2) Most Importantly: Contact Jon Bruning, the Nebraska Attorney General, since he is the last step in turning down a frivolous requirement for school accreditation.
3) Share this post.

ADDITION: MY COMMENT TO ATTORNEY GENERAL JON BRUNING:

Greetings,

I'm aware that the Attorney General will be asked to approve a proposal that requires public schools to provide daily recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance or lose accreditation and be forced to end school operation. I implore you to turn down this proposed requirement.

The other requirements in Section 3 of Rule 10 regarding accreditation are things such as the regulation of subject matter, teacher and administer certification, class credits, length of school year, reports etc. Those things are legitimate to proper operation of schools and I can see how failure to meet those requirements could be detrimental to standards of promoting education.

However, I do not believe that the daily recitation of the pledge is of enough importance to education that failure to do so is cause to terminate school accreditation and operation.

I understand there is a desire to promote patriotism and pride in one's country, but I think to install a requirement that endangers school operations is not the proper method to inspire our youth.

As I'm sure you are aware, the ACLU insists that teachers, as well as the students, are allowed the Constitutional right to abstain from participation in the Pledge of Allegiance without punishment. However, because this requirement would only be in effect in public schools, the number of students and teachers that may refrain from recitation due to any number of reasons, be it religion or national heritage, is worth considering.

Is this short recitation of a Pledge worth the daily awareness that some people are refraining from participation? Is not providing this opportunity worth shutting down educational institutions? I think not.

I would very much like to see the requirement turned down mostly because it should not carry enough weight to shut down schools. If the aim of this requirement is more patriotism, I think there are plenty of interactive educational opportunities that can provide more insight for students.

I do hope my comment is well received and that a more appropriate means of inspiring patriotism is developed instead of a requirement that threatens school accreditation.

Thank you.