Other Aspects posts are generating interesting comments. Thank you to all who have written. Thinking it a shame to keep them to myself, I will periodically gather and share items of general interest in a post called “Post Scripts”.
The sub-headings give the name and date of the post being addressed (recognizing that some posts build upon previous ones). The comments are in italics; my replies are not. I will edit only in the interest of space and contextual consistency. Enjoy, and please keep sending your thoughts to KenBossong@gmail.com. Finally, if anyone does not wish to be quoted, even anonymously as I’ll be doing it, please just say so when you email me.
Otis Rush: An Appreciation (1/18/19)
There was considerable response to the Otis Rush tribute. While some were already fans, many said how rewarding a revelation listening to him had been:
I very much enjoyed the Otis Rush remembrance. Nicely written and complete. I viewed him as a minor figure until you talked to me about him a few years back and I started listening.
Great tribute to Otis Rush. I look forward to following your blog.
I am not much into jazz and blues–preferring classical, 60s rock and country–but your Otis Rush ode prompted me go to YouTube to watch and listen to what I could find regarding him. I chose the Live at Montreux concert from 1986. You may get me yet.
Good choice for something to watch, with Otis being joined on stage by admirers Eric Clapton and Luther Allison. This concert marked something of a comeback for Otis from some lean years. Make sure you get to hear the best of his Cobra recordings.
Thanks for sharing this. [We] enjoyed your tribute to Otis Rush; we were both struck by how well your voice comes across in your writing.
Your piece on Otis Rush was spot on, as I also think he was truly one of the greats. We all know where Mike Bloomfield got his inspiration from.
Doing the Limbo Inside the Beltway (1/25/19)
I enjoyed reading this and certainly agree with you on a need for no more “How Low can we go!”
Unfortunately, there is no end in sight for “How low can you go?” January, when the post was written, already seems a long time ago.
What Makes Jazz So Endearing and Enduring (3/4/19)
The one on what makes jazz was a nicely done, succinct statement that I printed out and saved for reference.
I really enjoyed the article about Jazz. I have always had a love for it, but had no idea about the depth of Jazz.
Life as a Zero Sum Game: It Ain’t Necessarily So (4/2/19)
I read your blog post and found it very interesting especially your view of the political landscape. One thing that you didn’t mention is that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote but not the electoral college which is, I believe, one of the reasons there is so much discontent in the political scene. I have heard people say, so my vote really doesn’t count. I’m not a fan of labeling left vs right. I can identify with both because I have voted for both Republican and Democratic presidents in my lifetime. However, as you stated there is a vitriol and a need to categorize people as either all good or all bad politically lately which equals to your point, 0 Sum.
Another reader used bold to supplement my portrayal of how environmentalists see the other side of the debate:
These huge corporations are legally required to care only about maximizing profit and nothing about the environment beyond regulation. Since environmental damage is not monetarily accounted for in a company bottom line, the choice to befoul our common property is nearly always the one that shareholders require the company to make. There’s nothing they won’t befoul to make a buck, per design. If we leave them to their own devices, the planet will be unlivable before we know it. Therefore, absent correct financial accounting of the environmental damage done, strong environmental regulations are required to ensure that the needs of everyone are balanced with the greed of the shareholders.
Add “civil liability” to “regulation” here. When something goes wrong, environmental clean-up can be hugely expensive, greatly affecting a company’s bottom line. Companies that reflexively choose to befoul are probably making bad business decisions. Ensuring that such decisions are regretted is sound public policy; that one should clean up the mess one creates is axiomatic. The “us vs. them” chasm and the zero-sum game remain unnecessary and counterproductive.
[In response to my open letter to scientists:]
Is this a response to a perceived problem? My take is that the scientists are not the problem and are not the ones who make it political. The consensus on climate change, which has been overwhelmingly consistent on the topic of AGW, does not seem to be enough. Not all of us can “take it” when presented with scientific consensus, apparently.
I don’t demand complete consensus, but the propensity of some “scientific studies” to produce results their sponsors prefer is no coincidence.
It’s Not Too Late To Learn From 2016 (4/18/19)
One reader paired a line in this post with something by Vonnegut years ago, as follows:
“There is a tragic flaw in our precious Constitution, and I don’t know what can be done to fix it. This is it: Only nut cases want to be president.” -Kurt Vonnegut
“Perhaps we have made the job of President, or the process of attaining it, so distasteful that no one who would be ideal to serve is willing to seek it.”
I don’t remember reading Vonnegut’s piece “Cold Turkey” in the May 10, 2004 edition of In These Times, but I can’t swear I didn’t, either.
Referring to the portions of the post where I (a) say what voters like me seek in a president is “someone who is smart, sane, honorable, effective, and sensible” and (b) indicate that it should not be a given that the incumbent be the Republican nominee, a reader had this:
I’ll bet you $20 (or whatever alternate wager) that if he’s still in office come primary time, he’s the candidate. He demonstrated clear unfitness for office before 2016. The “enough is enough” moment should have happened a LONG time ago for any smart, sane, honorable, effective, and sensible republican. I have ZERO expectations that anything should change before 2020.
From another reader:
In 1968, Richard Nixon watched the crowds flock to George Wallace rallies and devised the brilliant if inherently evil “Southern Strategy,” an appeal to racism that was hugely successful. The Republican Party has been running on that and its evolutionary progeny ever since. Trump is the apotheosis of that reprehensible scheme. Liberals and what some call “socialists” (they have no idea what real socialism is) a la Bernie Sanders are way out there and thus unacceptable. However, they do not merit the same condemnation as today’s Republicans, who have abandoned the principles of rational conservatism for the crass electoral flavor of the moment. They deserve to be called out for their craven hypocrisy.
I expected plenty of feedback on this post. I was a bit surprised, however, not to hear from people with other reasons to believe the incumbent president should automatically be the nominee. Hopefully it’s clear that the point was not to predict an outcome, but to argue for a much-needed real discussion within the Republican Party.
Immigration – Governing With Nods and Winks (5/10/19)
The seasonal guest worker programs under which what we used to call “migrants” come here to help the harvest was something I grew up around. I visited several migrant camps out of curiosity and observed appalling living conditions. I also observed how hard they worked. Few native-born Americans could match them. [A relative] works in that county and has special responsibility for migrants. She says nothing has changed except a visceral fear among her clients about what Trump’s nativist, faux-hostility will do to their livelihoods.
Recalling a Great Little Sports Story (5/22)
Thanks Ken for making us aware of this story. It goes well beyond sports and sportsmanship, and many happenings in the pro sports world pale in comparison to it.
The Coarse in Our Discourse (6/28/19)
I just read your most recent blog post and your conjuring of [Richard Neustadt’s] Presidential Power struck a chord and brought up a memory that had been buried for decades…I disagree, however, that federalizing the Arkansas National Guard and sending them to Central High School in Little Rock was a sign of weakness. Rather, it was the measured and effective use of a powerful weapon that the Federalists included in their plan for the new country. I commend Eisenhower for doing it. Faubus needed to stand in the schoolhouse door for his own political survival. Words would never have persuaded him otherwise. When we visited the Central High School visitor center and museum that the National Park Service maintains across the street, we were surprised to learn that Faubus was somewhat sympathetic to integration. Sending in the Guard was a “win-win” for all sides, Faubus included.
This one motivated me to read more on Faubus. Sure enough, Orval was a more complex character than first appears. Every account seems to cast him in a different light. While his presentation as the outraged school-segregationist governor was beyond convincing, he had already desegregated public transportation in Arkansas. Was it simply that Orval could abide integration on buses but not for kids in schools, or was the whole thing with Ike and the 101st Airborne just a cleverly choreographed strategy for integrating schools without casualties?
The truth was probably somewhere in between. After all, Orval himself had upped the ante by predicting “blood will run in the streets” if Brown v. Board were enforced, and later closed the integrated school for the ’58-’59 school year.
I, too, commend Eisenhower for doing what he had to do. Neustadt’s central point remains that the most important and impressive power is the power to persuade – even, perhaps especially, for the President of the United States.
Ken Bossong
© 2019 Kenneth J. Bossong