It’s a Bird! It’s a Plane…!

Balloons, satellites, various unique aircraft (and now drones) have been used by many nations for decades intended for surveillance, mapping, topography, weather, geological, atmospheric, military, and global strategic purposes – these devices are regularly deployed by developed nations with resources and technology able to support such efforts – for good or bad, many nations have been systematically launching these devices for many reasons since WW1.

Recently, we lost our collective minds (news/social media, self-aggrandizing elected officials, and influencing talking heads) because a series of these devices were spotted drifting from 35K ft to 60K ft across our nation and we eventually shot them down.

To be clear, we (the USA) also participate in these same practices of deploying devices over other nations – our current outrage is ridiculous if we allow ourselves to consider our same parallel behavior.

So, where can a device (balloon or similar object) legally be flown? Let’s consider a wider perspective as this perceived threat assessment continues to spiral out of control.

Title 49 U.S. Code § 40103 – Sovereignty and use of airspace gives FAA authority to determine plans/policies/regulations for the use of navigable airspace which loosely breaks down something like the following tedious paragraph:

1. According to https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ there are two categories of airspace – regulatory and nonregulatory – within these two categories, there are four subtypes: controlled, uncontrolled, special use, and other airspace – the categories and types of airspace are determined by the complexity/density of aircraft movements/operations conducted, safety requirements, and national and public interest.
2. Controlled Airspace is a generic term that covers the different classifications of airspace and defined dimensions which ATC service is provided – controlled airspace consists of: Class A, B, C, D, E.
3. The magic low altitude is 18K ft – Class A Airspace is generally the airspace from 18,000 ft up to and including flight level (generally 28K ft to 36K ft).
4. The magic high altitude is 60K ft – Upper Class E airspace operations refer to over 60K ft – this airspace has historically been limited due to the physical challenges of reduced atmospheric density (thin air), but surprisingly handy for balloons.

All that to say, over 18K ft and under 60K ft is certainly not free airspace, but US Code and FAA regulations offer wider latitude for devices we’re hearing a lot about in news/social media these days – most developed nations have similar rules/laws governing their airspace which includes our (USA) use of their airspace.

But, what about foreign devices creeping into US airspace? Today, Title 49 U.S. Code § 41703 – Navigation of Foreign Civil Aircraft – foreign aircraft, NOT part of the armed forces of a foreign country, may navigate in US airspace IF the same considerations are granted to the US, proper licensing/certificates are applied Sec of Transportation can authorize for commercial, scientific, research, etc navigation within terms prescribe with this code.

So, why are we freaking out?  Well, to be fair there are legitimate threats from foreign nation’s devices traversing US airspace – much in the same way that US controlled devices regularly traverse other nation’s airspace with the undisclosed intentions – both US and foreign nations bend the rules for self-serving and self-preserving reasons – perhaps the greater international community is overdue for diplomatic discussions regarding specific use and new definitions for sovereign airspace.

Because, developed nations (including US) regularly secretly/covertly use navigation of commercial, scientific, research, etc devices for military, defense, surveillance, and strategic purposes (crossing the legal streams, if you will) – these devices include balloons, satellites, various unique aircraft and drones – there is no complete integrity, transparency or honesty in this arena of international surveillance – and we are fools to think there ever will be.

So, as this UFO/threat/attack chaos continues to unfold, I found myself curious about the frequency of these type objects use, and how much (non-panicked) awareness we have of it.

Fun Facts: Every week over 10,000 balloons are launched by colleges/universities, military, environmental, commercial, meteorological, etc organizations around the world – these balloons range from as small as a beachball, to as large as one of Jupiter’s smaller moons (JK) – they do get pretty large in order to support their respective payloads – payloads can be as small as a briefcase, or as large as multiple buses – in fact, the large (China) balloon shot down off the coast of SC had a payload equal to 2.5 city buses – NOTE: I can’t believe so many educated people thought we should have shot that down over populated areas (idiots) – there are also an additional 100-200 amateur launches each week – these amateur objects also range in size and payload – the point, there are thousands of inflatable objects carrying undetermined payloads floating up there every day.

I will not dig deep into the large number of satellites and objects orbiting the planet all day, also every day – these devices have surveillance, attack, and threat capabilities far beyond the inflatable devises – in that case, perhaps we should start shooting down satellites (JK).

Is the treat from these objects real? Yes – but we (the USA) also own much of the responsibility for the ambiguity/confusion surrounding the threat, or threat deterrent – it’s pretty damn presumptuous of us to freak out over behavior we regularly participate in – yes, the greater international community is overdue for diplomatic discussions regarding specific use, and new definitions for sovereign airspace – or we could just start randomly shooting them down (JK).

Finally, is there a downside to shooting them down? We’ll know soon enough – human nature is sure to raise its ugly head – we shoot =  they shoot – it’s easy math – is that what we really want?

Global tensions are at a sustained high for many reasons – history, if nothing else, has taught us (over and over) we misunderstand each other’s national intents, more than we understand each other’s national intents – perhaps it’s best not to enter into a misguided global airspace shooting gallery over lack of analytical, mature, researched solutioning – plus (although not popular) diplomacy is not a bad option.  

I ask again, did we just shoot down some high school kid’s science project? It would not surprise me in the least.

All year, every year there are key political events that trigger challenging and engaging discussions/debates at group or individual levels – these key events range from elections, state of the union address (or commonwealth), tax seasons, national and local level budget/legislative/governance considerations, and SCOTUS judges/cases (just to name a few).

These discussions/debates can easily become contentious or provocative – if we find ourselves in challenging situations, perhaps we could consider some of the following so we can embrace engaging and avoid challenging:

Is there real value in our position? We all get to decide for ourselves what holds value in our lives, which often comes out in these exchanges.

Are we considering the fullness of a topic? There are always multiple sides of all situations – have we done our due diligence to clearly see multiple sides of the topic?

Is our position beneficial to an isolated group? This is not wrong, but it’s perceptive to show some empathy and acknowledge the disparity.

Is our position a truth – a falsehood – or maybe a half truth? Truths often require context, completeness, or chronological clarity to support our trustworthiness.

Finally, is our position an authentic refection of what we hope the world sees in us? Which (oddly enough) seldom has anything to do with politics.

Let our yes be yes, and our no be no.

Avoid voices making points but are really begging for $$$.

Consider voices making points for care, or support for those in need.

Avoid voices whose livelihood depends on you listening/following.

Consider voices whose purpose supports others, not themselves.

Avoid voices whose only contribution is parroting points of others.

Consider voices that are their own, grounded in substance, and don’t point to themselves.

Avoid voices that gain strength and volume from divisive, exclusionary, and degrading tactics.

Consider voices that emphasize unity, equality, fairness, and freedom.

Avoid voices that achieve gains on the backs, resources, or strength of others – and claim the success their own.

Consider voices that help others achieve gains despite their own challenges or shortcomings.

Avoid voices that sound like the thief Gestas – arrogant, insulting, and self-serving – defiant, harsh, and cruel.  

Consider voices that sound like Christ – majesty and greatest, but also humility – promotes justice, mercy, and grace – trust in and reliance on His Father’s will.

What voices do we listen to?

What voices do we hold fast to?

What voices do we share with others?

Voices matter.

Choose wisely.

I am no longer shocked by the nonbiblical, unconstitutional rhetoric being preached, taught, and introduced from many protestant churches, religious universities/colleges, and the greater hierarchy of our Christian communities – many of these institutions are embracing political agendas, candidates, and positions to the point of tainting basic Biblical and Constitutional truths for political gain.

The fastest growing and most damaging flavor of this corrupted belief is Christian nationalism – this nonbiblical ideology has always been a part of our American history – there are hundreds of well documented examples of Christian nationalism in the late 1800s, early 1900s, and post WWII periods – Christian nationalism typically resurfaces in conjunction with tough economic times, evolving national identity, racial conflict, and pressures from divided government – however, the focus of Christian nationalism has never been Christ, or Biblical principles – their focus has always been supremacy.    

Amanda Tyler, Executive Director Baptist Joint Committee (BJC) for religious liberty testified before a congressional committee looking into race (white) supremacy and Christian nationalism – her testimony got my attention because we share similar concerns about a surge of Christian nationalism platforms with politically laced agendas in many traditional churches today.

Here are some key take aways from her testimony and my associated concerns and perspectives:

Christian nationalism is a political ideology and cultural framework that seeks to “merge” American and Christian identities – it suggests “real” Americans are Christians and that “true” Christians hold a particular set of political beliefs – the biggest concern with this attempted merger is the glaring conflict with basic Biblical and Constitutional principles and basic truths.

The “Christian” in Christian nationalism is more about ethno-national identity (white, American born) than religion – Christian nationalism is a gross distortion of the Christian faith – it’s important to note that opposition to Christian nationalism is NOT opposition to Christianity, or Christian beliefs – a growing number of Christians feel a religious imperative to stand against Christian nationalism for these very reasons – however, this position is faced with vocal and critical attacks from members of their church communities who stand with the Christian national perspective.

Christian nationalism uses the language, symbols, and imagery of Christianity to cloak their supremist ideology – it may look and sound like Christianity to the casual observer – however, a close examination reveals it uses the facade of Christianity but does not point to Jesus the Christ – it points to political agendas, figures, parties, or ideologies – the absence of Christ, Christ’s character, compassion, love, service, and basic gospel principle are the clearest “litmus test” when evaluating Christian nationalism.

Christian nationalism often overlaps with and provides cover for race supremacy and racial subjugation ideology – it creates and perpetuates a sense of cultural belonging that is limited to certain people associated with the founding of the United States – namely native-born white Christians – this narrow nonbiblical position ignores the “great commission” (Matthew 28) and it’s application to all nations and peoples regardless of race, economy, government, etc.

Christian nationalism is not patriotism – patriotism is a healthy love of country – Christian nationalism is an allegiance to country that demands supremacy over all other allegiances – including natural Biblical and Constitutional allegiances – Christian nationalism relies on cherry picked and misleading versions of American history in order to justify and perpetuate their ideology – this is a tool used to bait followers and potential followers into leveraging their white native born status for supremacy and position in an environment ripe with decay as a result of disorder caused by nonwhite, nonnative born believers and citizens.

The Christian nationalist myth must downplay or ignore the role of indigenous communities, black Americans, immigrant populations, religious minorities, secular Americans, and all others who undercut the false narrative that the United States is special because it was founded by, and for white Christians

This myth of a Christian nation is worse than just bad history – it undermines and contradicts the US Constitution – specifically, the prohibition in Article 6 against religious tests for public office – one of the truly revolutionary aspects of the Constitution that laid the foundation for the US being a faith freedom nation – Christina nationalism is also in conflict with basic Biblical principles of a loving Christ centered gospel, compassion and care for all, a salvation motivated desire to share, serve, and minister to all.

Many Christians and church leaders have joined in the fight against Christian nationalism because of increasing alarm about the violence, hate, and false teachings it has inspired against many of our country’s houses of worship, races, citizenship status, etc, etc.  – Christian nationalism inspires race, economic status, and citizenship status supremacist in public violent condemning ways – Christian nationalism fuels many attacks, protests, and defamation on federal, state, and local political, election and legislative agencies uniting disparate actors and infusing their political cause with false religious fervor.

It is essential that Americans, Christians, public, and government platforms confront race supremacy and investigate its myriad of causes – understanding Christian nationalism is imperative to both dismantling supremacy and preserving religious freedom for all.

Christianity does not unite Americans – our belonging and American society must never depend on how we worship, what we believe, or how we identify religiously – we should never allow anyone to say, that confronting Christian nationalism is somehow anti-Christian.

Groups of Christians across the world are alarmed by this false and damaging ideology – especially the way it gives an illusion of respectability to race supremacy and undermines our nation’s foundational commitment to ensure religious freedom for all.

Do we hear the Christian national narrative from our pulpits, Sunday school classes, Bible studies, etc, etc?

Do we call it out for the lie that it is and stand against it?

Do we recognize it laced into political agendas and candidates?

Don’t be fooled by it – Christian nationalism is hate, bigotry, a false supremacy – worst of all for Christian Americans, it is nonbiblical, unconstitutional, and absolutely against the teachings of Jesus the Christ.

A fool will always be a fool, especially after the election.

Why is it a mistake to forsake character when casting our vote?

Make no mistake about it – many state and national level politicians openly demonstrate more about themselves and their true character than ever before – the good, bad and the ugly laid bare for all to see and evaluate – compromised character in our politics, press, pundits, platforms, pay outs, and pay offs are no longer hidden or covered up.

There seems to be a nationwide acceptance of lies fake/false narratives, hypocritical positions, personal attacks, and massive grifting unashamedly from both major political parties – all fueled by billions of dollars from agenda hungry PACs, special interests, and organizations motivated by self interest over any effort to consider the greater good.

Sadly, it feels as though character does not matter as long as certain agenda items are addressed by our party or candidate – all of us have specific political agenda items that are important to us – so important that we’ve succumb to supporting parties and candidates with very compromised characters – yes, these agenda items are critical, but are they critical enough that we should bed ourselves with the worst corrupt politics has to offer?  It’s not very popular these days, but some feel its past time for “we the people” to put a stop to this.

The noise and hype from the flood of character flawed voices is so loud and far reaching that ‘plain-speak’ voices, positions and platforms are being drowned out – we’re sinking into a political environment that believes louder is better regardless of associated character flaws – truth is secondary to attention grabbing – reality is subordinate to fabricated narratives – facts are conveniently ignored to bait a viewer/reader into a tainted narrative.

Every political actions (good or bad) has a tail left in its wake – that tail will always be positive progress, or negative fallout – the potential for positive progress is greatly diminished if the behavior comes from a person, party, or platform neck deep in compromised character – this can’t be more evident if we consider the cost of the negative fallout – the cost will always have a greater negative impact on the lesser of us, than the more comfortable of us.

Now, more than ever, we should consider the character of those running, and the character of those who promote politicians – if their behavior illustrates gross character flaws, perhaps we should reconsider regardless of our political leanings – critical agenda items fall by the wayside every two years – these items can be recovered and reenergized – but a character flawed elected official (at any level) will have lasting and far reaching negative fallout –  this fall out drags us deeper into political chaos, and farther from an atmosphere of addressing the greater good of the nation.  

FACTS: Character is an essential trait for leadership, politics, or public service – character builds trust and credibility, promotes loyalty to the people, and impowers positive progress – a person of good character is someone who understands integrity, responsibility, compassion, and forgiveness – persons of good character are selfless, caring for others more than themselves – but on the other hand…

MORE FACTS: Persons of compromised character cannot be trusted speak truth or keep their promises – they pass blame to others – they punish others for their bad behavior – they are easily coerced into deeper compromises – they do not care for others – their motives are not the motives of a nation longing for truth and justice.

We often see public service with a focus on people skills, communications skills, vision, intelligence, business insight, even confidence – truth be told, none of that will make a good public servant without a foundational good character – all of those people skills can be tainted by bad character in the long run.

No political agenda item carries more weight than members of our government that are trustworthy, reliable, honest, loyal to the people not the party, brave, seek common good, open to counsel/discovery,  considers perspectives of other ideas, and have moral courage – just for starters.

Tragically, both parties and most candidates exhibit only a fraction of these critical character traits – and somehow, we’ve become accepting of this fact – shame on us.   

Do we plan to vote for someone we know (deep down) lacks self-discipline and moral courage? We know they will not do what is right in the face of party pressures – we know they don’t have any core values that guide their behavior – we know they don’t have any true sense of identity that governs their decisions and motives.  

In most cases we know the truth – we know they are they just another mouth piece for corrupt politics – they’re just posturing for agendas that support the few, and build up their personal gain – time and time again their compromised character is on full display, and many of us will still vote for them.

Intelligence, talent and all those skill-based competencies are irrelevant to public service, leadership, and governance without good character – this is why the compromised, self-serving, charismatic sometimes get ahead initially, but eventually they will be found out and we can only blame ourselves.

Good character is not just for the noble hearted, it is a choice –  it’s a whole series of choices – both parties and most politicians have already been making their choices – now it time for us to make ours.

Don’t Cross the Streams!

“Excuse me Egon, you said crossing the streams was bad!”

This classic line from the 1984 film “Ghostbusters” is the perfect illustration of a known and accepted practice that if flipped (depending on your politics) will be either good or bad.

The streams that are not traditionally crossed for the purpose of this rant are pulpits and politics.

Not 100%, but for the most part pulpits were largely quiet on political topics – not so much today – like a slow 100-year leak in an earthen dam, the flood of political pulpits is now raging unchecked.

For many years church leaders preached mainly on Biblical principles – from time to time they would reference a modern-day application of the principle being taught – illustrating God’s intent for us in real life (so to speak) – sometimes, (delicately) politics would surface in a sermon, but the emphasis was largely the Biblical principle.

Today, church leaders are all over local/cable news channels, talking head’s talk shows, social media, political rallies, shamelessly supporting candidates as vigorously as they attack relevant opponents – this crossing of pulpit and political streams will surly weaken the legitimacy, trust, and assurance of the pulpit – any actions taken by the pulpit that distracts from its genuine Spiritual task and purpose will erode it’s foundation of Biblical principles – politics are already a tainted, untrusted, and compromised vessel claiming the will of all the people – bedding with such a stained mistress will definitely do lasting harm to the pulpit and it’s ministries.

The cause of Christ – Biblical principles – the Ten Commandments – the Great Commission always require greater weight than any political position or platform, especially from the pulpit – today, prominent pastors, church, and seminary leaders are visibly lined up (by the thousands) to lock arms with politicians sour with the stench of Christian Nationalism.

It’s an easy google search to expose the thousands of examples of “crossed pulpit and political streams” – as someone who has worked on church committees for many years, I’ve got to wonder what the committee meetings are like at First Baptist Church of Dallas (for example) – do they ever raise a concern that their pastor has shunned everyone who will not vote like he does – do they worry that their church has become so identified with a political agenda that it might be eroding basic Biblical principles – do they question, if their services resemble political rallies more than worship are they jeopardizing their tax-exempt status – do they question the pastor’s obvious misuse and abuse of  Scripture – the tragedy of this example, is that it is not exaggerated or embellished – I almost wish it was to buffer greater cause of Christ – but it is not exaggerated or embellished, these leaders are unashamedly, visibly embracing political platforms despite the conflict with basic Christian doctrine.  

Sadly, this “crossing the streams” illustration gets worse – just like politics, money talks – the slippery slope of pulpit politics is financially rewarding for those who play the game – money and members come running to pulpits, institutions and leaders who promote the exciting, flamboyant, and entertaining message of politics – they take the money, members, and fame without care that their compromised image is screaming falsehoods to the lost world around them.

Sorry, there’s more – pulpits laced with political agendas are telling a false story that there’s only one true way to be a faithful Christian, and that story is being aligned with political agendas – this is crushing when authentic Christ centered Believers tells a different story (without political agendas) about what it truly means to follow Jesus –  the true Believer gets shunned, labeled, and scorned by members of their own church community – not to mention the real harm it does to the lost because of the false (political) message – it’s a lie – call it what it is – a false (political) message equals, concealing salvation from the lost – think about that.  

Our nation is extremely divided by political issues – now more than ever, churches need to reclaim messages that are Biblically sound — whether it appears political or not – politics cannot define what is Biblically sound – Biblical principles rise above political divide – politics require dialogue, governance, and compromise for a greater good – Biblical principles, outreach, and discipleship require reaching across political divides for greater and more effective ministries.

Consider how our politics measure up against these Biblical principles:

God created all people – God does not discriminate and (simply stated) neither should we.

God loves all people – sinners – foreigners – conservatives – liberals – all races – each gender – regardless of marital status – education – wealth – political platform – God does not love any of us more than the other.

God sees all life as sacred – a constant equitable moral application of this principle is not without conflict or discussion – a pro-life position is critical – but, if that position ignores deaths as a result of being poor, unhoused, illegal injustice, nationless, without basic requirements for life (clean water, food, etc), unjustly imprisoned, deprived healthcare, etc., etc. is not a constant equitable moral application of the principle, or vice versa (for that matter).

God hates injustice – Biblical principles are very clear about uneven scales, deceitful business practices, discrimination, haughtiness, caring for others, and love of self – injustice is rampant in our businesses, legal processes, election districts, application of the law, access to resources, care and education.

God teaches us to care for the poor, underprivileged, immigrants, refugees, widows, and orphans – Jesus never sided with the rich or well to do – God lifted the lowly and brought down the mighty.

God breaks down barriers – the movement of God across all time, and in our lives is the Spiritual force that tears down barriers and changes lives…. including political barriers.

Sadly, many of us choose political views and let those views shape our “religious practices” despite our actual beliefs – this may explain why our politics are so out of line with our beliefs – time, and our corrosive political divide have made many pulpits and politics into a single “stream” that does not reflect Christ or His teachings.

There are well defined processes to keep the pulpit and political streams separated:

POLITICAL STREAMS = Vote on political issues – support political issues in the world around you – your vote is the long-term key to political gain.

PULPIT STREAMS = Minister with only sound Biblical principles – support ministries in the world around you – sound ministries don’t require politics to be effective.

Joshua says, “choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your ancestors served in the region beyond the river, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord” (Joshua 24:15)

Why is it so hard for us to change our minds (even if we know we could be wrong) – we all want to think we stand firm for the things we believe in – beliefs are really important – none of us want our friends and family too see us as ‘flip floppers’.

Perhaps, there’s a difference between rethinking a topic, and flip flopping – flip flopping is changing one’s mind because it’s convenient – it may suit an immediate need to flip – or we may not actually change our minds, and we tell people what they expect to hear due to peer, social, political pressures (without honestly reconsidering a topic) – by doing this, we risk deliberately discarding consideration for accuracy, substance, equitability, and perhaps truth.

Rethinking, on the other hand, involves confirming a belief by way of genuine validation – it requires an effort for the sake of truth, despite external pressures – it requires investing sweat equity to increase the value of our belief, and for the greater good of more than just ourselves.   

I recently learned that we typically fall into three modes reference our views of a topic:

Preacher mode = defending a view that we already hold (justified or not).

Prosecutor mode = attacking someone else’s views (with or without merit).

Politician mode = we only listen to people if they agree with our views (with or without validation).

We seldom fall into any version of verification modes:

“I need to do research” mode.

“What is the source for that” mode.

“Is that really a Biblical, or Constitutional or truth” mode.

All three of these modes make it hard to ‘rethink’ because we’ve already concluded that we’re ‘right’ and the other person is ‘wrong’ – we’ve jumped to the position that our cognitive work is done – even if we’ve made no real intellectual, Spiritual, rational investment on a topic – sadly, in many cases, we’re simple holding fast to a position that we just heard from someone else without examining to topic.

We would all agree that facts are important (I hope this is true) – there is no substitute for truth and accuracy – in order for a fact to be a fact, it requires truth and accuracy – these should be required ingredients before we decide about holding fast to a topic – so why is it so hard for us to even consider whether or not our position is based on facts (truth and accuracy)?

Truth and accuracy impower us to avoid anger, blaming, or shaming as a method of accountability – and help us lean into love, grace, and respect as a method of clarity and inclusion – the baseline topic requires the work to validate our belief with truth and accuracy.

Our nation is fiercely divided on many topics – we are angrily aligned with many of these topics – are we sure about the truth and accuracy we associate with each of these topics?

Being honest with ourselves carries great weight – don’t miss out.

Our politics are fickle (again) – our obvious political divide continues to cripple our ability to think clearly about issues – but no way will we admit it – we just continue to inexplicitly jump on the many passing bandwagons, as we’re directed to by the talking heads without ever considering disconnects between our outrage and our own patterns of political behavior – for example:

Evidently the sky is falling because of the college loan bailouts.

On the Left, I really do believe Biden’s college loan relief effort was strategically focused on midterm elections – the relief is way-way too broad and far reaching – this could have easily been narrowed down to cases of genuine financial hardship and it really should target the hellish predatory college loans.

On the Right, I like the points about accountability and “responsibility” (at one time this was a GOP standard) – but (oddly) not a word about the “responsibility” for tens of thousands of Govt backed predatory college loans tangled up in this – also, not a word about the mega-billions of dollars in our nation’s history of bailouts of (not 100%, but largely) GOP favored entities.

For example – major bailouts over the past 4 decades: Big Businesses, Rail Industry (X2), Lockheed, NYC, Busted Govt Programs (countless), Banks (so many), Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac (X2), AIG, PPP Loans (1000’s), Auto Industry (X2), Housing Industry, Airline Industry (X2), Bear Stearns, TARP (oh so many), etc., etc…

Our (Left and Right) responses want the “divide” to have more weight than the issue to be addressed – fickle for sure.

POINT: There is a “clear and present disconnect” in our political outrage verses our political patterns – this is the core of the “clear and present danger” of holding fast to our political divide more than working the issue at hand – we’ve become so driven by talking heads shouting and snapping their fingers to draw attention away from real issues, and focusing us on their urgency for greater political divide –  the hype for the divide, instead of the issues is perilously explosive – this is so dangerous for the nation.  

We can work issues – we can find common ground – we can insist on more from our elected officials – we can turn down the volume down on talking heads (who are getting rich from this) – at this point, both major parties are sheep – we can do better,

We used to do better.