|
This Sabri Bebawi’s Resistance Club includes ideas, and philosophical thoughts that are intended to intrigue and raise consciousnesses. As a philosopher, I often ponder over existential questions and societal issues, aiming to stimulate critical thinking and foster enlightened conversations among my readers.
|
As we age, the world evolves in ways that can make it challenging for those over 60 to relate to younger generations. Rapid technological advancements and shifting social norms create a landscape that feels markedly different from the one experienced in earlier decades. For instance, the ubiquitous presence of digital technology and social media platforms has transformed communication, often in ways that older individuals may find unfamiliar or overwhelming. Additionally, generational differences in values, priorities, and cultural references can create gaps in understanding and empathy. As society progresses, the pace of change means that experiences and perspectives from earlier times may become increasingly out of sync with the current realities faced by younger people, making it harder to bridge these generational divides.
|
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 9TH, 2024
I participated once in a competition of the best quote. I wrote a simple logical quote that read “The number one cause of death is birth.”I have been bothered by doctors keep telling us the number one cause of death is this or that. Thinking logically and pragmatically about it, I could conclude easily that the number one cause of death is birth. Had we not been born, we would never die, right? I was very surprised that such a quote won an award as best quote.
|
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10TH, 2024
This writer does not think that there is a difference between the brain and the soul; they are one and the same. Regardless of varying philosophical views, this perspective encourages a holistic understanding of human consciousness.
The brain and the soul are often thought of as representing different aspects of human existence. The brain, a tangible organ composed of neurons and synapses, governs cognitive functions, emotions, and behaviors through biological processes. It is the seat of rational thought, memory, and sensory perception, functioning as the hardware of our mental experiences. In contrast, the soul is a more abstract concept, often associated with the essence of a person’s identity and morality, perceived as transcending physical existence. While the brain is studied through neuroscience and medicine, the soul is explored through philosophy, religion, and personal introspection, representing the intangible qualities that shape our sense of self and purpose beyond the measurable confines of the brain’s activity. What do you think?
|
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10TH, 2024
Republicanism, in its most extreme forms, can be seen as an undesirable ideology due to its potential to undermine democratic principles and concentrate power within a narrow elite. By prioritizing the interests of a specific political or economic class, it often disregards the broader needs of the populace, leading to a governance system that benefits a select few while marginalizing the majority. This can result in a lack of accountability and transparency, as decisions are made behind closed doors rather than through open, democratic processes. Furthermore, the emphasis on traditional hierarchies and the preservation of established power structures can stifle innovation and reform, making it difficult for societies to adapt to changing conditions and address emerging challenges effectively.
|
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10TH, 2024
Have you, like I have, wondered why the American Dollar has the phrase “In God We Trust?” The motto has been in continuous use on the one-cent coin since 1909 and on the ten-cent coin since 1916. It has also appeared on all gold coins, silver-dollar coins, half-dollar coins, and quarter-dollar coins struck since July 1, 1908.It serves as a motto reflecting the phoney religious and cultural values that have historically influenced the nation.
While the argument is that the motto reinforces the nation's commitment to freedom and unity.we know well that the United States
has a complex and multifaceted history that requires ongoing reflection and dialogue. Despite that most Americans claim to be religious, even evangelicals, there are still significant cultural and political divides that challenge the nation's cohesion. This writer does not think that Americans are religious at all, but they use religion as a tool for political and social agendas which creates a complex landscape where personal beliefs are often intertwined with larger ideological battles. This dynamic often leads to heated debates about the role of religion in public life.
It has occurred to me, finally, considering all this, that the phrase “In God We Trust” does not refer to the God of whom people think and worship; it refers to the dollar itself. The “Dollar” is America’s God that Americans worship.
|
Wednesday, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2024
Project 2025, an initiative aimed at overhauling various aspects of government operations, has faced criticism for its potentially adverse impacts. One major concern is that its aggressive implementation could lead to significant disruptions in public services, affecting millions of citizens who rely on these services daily. The restructuring efforts may result in job losses and reduced efficiency as employees grapple with new systems and procedures. Additionally, the project's top-down approach could exacerbate bureaucratic inefficiencies and create confusion among stakeholders, leading to a lack of clarity and accountability. Such upheaval might undermine public trust and further complicate an already complex governmental landscape.
|
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2024
Last night's presidential debate was a high-stakes spectacle that underscored the sharp contrasts between the candidates. The forum was charged with energy as they exchanged barbs on key issues like the economy, healthcare, and foreign policy. The incumbent touted their administration's achievements and criticized the challenger's proposals as unrealistic, while the challenger argued that the current administration had failed to address pressing problems and promised sweeping reforms. The debate was marked by moments of heated rhetoric and impassioned pleas, making it clear that the race is poised to be fiercely competitive. Analysts will be dissecting the candidates' performances for weeks to come, but it's evident that last night’s debate has intensified the already charged political atmosphere.
Donald Trump's tenure as president was marked by frequent instances of exaggeration and misinformation. His propensity for fibbing was evident in numerous public statements and claims that often lacked factual support or were later contradicted by evidence. Whether it was overestimating the size of his inauguration crowd, making dubious assertions about voter fraud, or presenting misleading statistics, Trump's tendency to blur the lines between fact and fiction became a defining feature of his public persona. This approach not only fueled political controversy but also raised concerns about the erosion of trust in public discourse and the media's role in holding leaders accountable.
Kamala Harris effectively put Donald Trump in his place during the 2020 Vice Presidential debate by delivering sharp, fact-based rebuttals to his misleading statements and aggressive interruptions. Her assertive demeanor and command of policy details showcased her preparation and ability to remain composed under pressure. Harris called out Trump's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and his administration's shortcomings with a clarity that contrasted with his often erratic responses. Her ability to address his attacks head-on, while maintaining a focus on substantive issues, demonstrated her readiness for high-stakes political discourse and underscored her position as a formidable opponent in the political arena.
|
Donald Trump’s tenure as President revealed several issues that raise concerns about his fitness for the role. His approach to governance often lacked consistency and adherence to established norms, resulting in frequent controversies and a polarized political climate. His handling of critical issues, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and international relations, was marked by erratic decision-making and a disregard for expert advice. Furthermore, his divisive rhetoric and actions contributed to an erosion of democratic norms and heightened social tensions. These factors collectively suggest that his leadership style may not align with the demands of the presidency, which requires stability, integrity, and a commitment to unifying and effectively managing the nation.
Donald Trump's public behavior and rhetoric have been the subject of significant scrutiny and debate. Many critics argue that his statements and actions have displayed a pattern of divisiveness and aggression toward various groups, both domestically and internationally.
Trump's tenure as President of the United States was marked by a number of controversial statements and policies that were seen as targeting specific communities. For example, his remarks about immigrants, particularly those from Mexico, were widely criticized for being inflammatory and discriminatory. He often used language that was perceived as derogatory, which fueled tensions and divisions among the American public.
His approach to international relations also reflected a confrontational style. Trump’s relationships with other countries were frequently marked by aggressive rhetoric and a tendency to prioritize unilateral actions over diplomatic engagement. His “America First” policy and harsh criticisms of traditional allies, along with his approach to trade and defense, were seen as exacerbating global tensions.
Moreover, Trump’s interactions with the media, political opponents, and even members of his own party were often characterized by a combative tone. His frequent use of social media to attack critics and spread misinformation contributed to a polarized political climate.
It’s important to note that Trump’s supporters often view his behavior as a direct challenge to a perceived establishment that they believe has failed to address their concerns. They argue that his bluntness and unorthodox style are signs of his commitment to shaking up a system they see as corrupt or ineffective.
The broader impact of Trump's rhetoric and behavior continues to be debated. Critics argue that his aggressive style has exacerbated divisions and undermined social cohesion, while supporters see it as a necessary disruption of a status quo they believe was not serving their interests. The legacy of his approach will likely be a topic of discussion and analysis for years to come.
A Mad Man Not Fit to Be A Janitor in The White House
|
THURSAY, SEPTEMBER 12TH, 2024
Time's Fleeting Embrace: A Reflection on the Passage of Life
Time is an elusive and enigmatic force, slipping through our fingers with a swiftness that often goes unnoticed until it is too late. As I find myself at the cusp of 68 years, I am struck by the paradox of time's rapid passage and its accompanying absence of substantive memories. It feels as though 60 of those years have evaporated, leaving only fleeting fragments of moments, rather than the continuous narrative of days, weeks, or months that one might expect.
Our memories become like snapshots in a photo album, each one capturing a brief instant but failing to provide a coherent picture of our lives. These moments, while vivid, are disconnected from the larger tapestry of time. As I reflect on the years that have passed, it becomes clear that the continuity of time has been more of an illusion than a tangible experience. I am left with the disconcerting realization that time, once gone, is irretrievably lost, never to return.
This contemplation leads us to ponder the nature and purpose of our existence. The inevitability of aging and the transience of our memories provoke deep existential questions. We might find ourselves envying those who seek solace in the belief of a divine being or an overarching purpose, even though such beliefs offer no definitive answers. The comfort of faith or the illusion of a higher purpose can be alluring, yet it remains uncertain whether such beliefs can ever truly address the fundamental question of why we are here.
As we confront the reality of our own impermanence, the idea that we will eventually cease to exist—becoming nothing more than a whisper in the vast expanse of time—can be profoundly unsettling. The thought that we might be deprived even of the memories that once brought us joy and solace is a sobering one. Our existence, though momentarily significant, seems destined to be erased from the cosmic ledger, leaving no trace of our personal stories or experiences.
The universe, vast and indifferent, continues its eternal march, encompassing all of life and extending far beyond the reach of our understanding. It persists in its grandeur, while we, mere specks within its boundless expanse, grapple with our ephemeral nature. The question of why we exist, and the search for meaning in a seemingly indifferent universe, remains unanswered.
In the end, the nature of time and our place within it is a profound and unanswered mystery. We may seek purpose in our fleeting lives, but the vastness of the universe reminds us of our limited perspective. As we navigate the passage of time and reflect on its impact, we are left with the poignant recognition that our quest for meaning may always remain just beyond our grasp.
|
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 12TH, 2024
In contemporary American discourse, immigrants have increasingly become the target of vilification, often unjustly accused of a range of crimes and societal ills. This narrative bears alarming similarities to the scapegoating strategies used during historical periods of turmoil, such as those seen in Nazi Germany under Hitler. Today, immigrants are frequently demonized as criminals, murderers, rapists, and even as people who eat cats and dogs. Such rhetoric not only distorts the reality of immigration but also endangers countless individuals and undermines the social fabric of the nation.
The Misrepresentation of Immigrants
The portrayal of immigrants as a source of societal problems is a dangerous oversimplification. Far from being the criminal threats they are often made out to be, many immigrants contribute positively to the country. For instance, highly educated immigrants bring expertise and innovation across various fields. They work as doctors, engineers, and scientists, contributing significantly to advancements in technology and healthcare. Their presence enriches American culture and economy, showcasing the country's strength in diversity.
On the other hand, immigrants who work in blue-collar jobs often perform essential functions in society. In states like Florida, the contributions of immigrants are palpable and critical, highlighting a reality reminiscent of the film A Day Without a Mexican. This film underscores the indispensable role that immigrants play in maintaining the everyday operations of a community, from agriculture to service industries.
The Consequences of Scapegoating
The harmful narrative that depicts immigrants as a threat has real-world consequences. It not only fosters a climate of fear and hostility but also emboldens individuals and groups to commit acts of violence and discrimination against immigrants. When propaganda targets a particular group, it taps into and amplifies pre-existing prejudices and fears, leading to unjust treatment and violence against innocent people.
Moreover, such a narrative neglects to acknowledge the complex realities of immigration. Immigrants, regardless of their educational background or job status, are integral to the social and economic fabric of the nation. They face numerous challenges, from legal hurdles to social discrimination, yet their contributions remain invaluable.
Political Responsibility and Accountability
The political rhetoric surrounding immigration has been particularly polarizing. Figures like former President Donald Trump and many Republican leaders have been prominent in amplifying negative stereotypes about immigrants. This approach has been used to galvanize political bases by appealing to fear and prejudice, rather than addressing the nuanced realities of immigration.
Accountability is essential in this context. Political leaders who perpetuate harmful stereotypes and propagate misinformation about immigrants bear responsibility for fostering a climate of division and hatred. Their rhetoric not only misguides public perception but also contributes to policy decisions that can have detrimental effects on immigrant communities.
A Call for Rational Discourse
It is imperative for the American public and policymakers to engage in a more informed and empathetic discourse about immigration. Recognizing the positive contributions of immigrants and addressing the systemic issues that contribute to their challenges can pave the way for more inclusive and effective immigration policies.
Educational initiatives, community dialogues, and fair media representation can counteract the harmful narratives and promote a more accurate understanding of immigrants' roles in society. By focusing on the facts and celebrating the diversity that immigrants bring, the nation can move towards a more just and equitable approach to immigration.
In conclusion, the unjust blaming of immigrants for societal problems is a troubling phenomenon that echoes historical patterns of scapegoating. It is essential to challenge these narratives and hold accountable those who use them for political gain. Recognizing the invaluable contributions of immigrants and fostering a more informed and compassionate discourse can help remedy the current climate of division and prejudice.
Watch Republicans Begging Foreigners to Come Back Florida: Immigrants play a crucial role in bolstering the state's economy and cultural diversity.
|
FRiDAY, SEPTEMBER 13TH, 2024
Floridians ought to remove their governor immediately
Background and Critique of Ron DeSantis: Policies and Perspectives
Ron DeSantis, the Governor of Florida, has emerged as a controversial figure in American politics, particularly due to his policies and rhetoric on issues related to race, gender, and education. His tenure has been marked by a series of actions and policies that many critics argue are discriminatory and regressive, including efforts to ban certain books and limit educational content about Black history. This essay will explore the background of Ron DeSantis, the implications of his policies, and consider potential responses to address the challenges posed by his approach to governance.
Ron DeSantis was born on September 14, 1978, in Jacksonville, Florida. He graduated from Yale University with a degree in History and later earned a J.D. from Harvard Law School. Before entering politics, DeSantis served as a Judge Advocate General (JAG) officer in the U.S. Navy, which he often highlights as a testament to his commitment to public service.
DeSantis’s political career began in 2012 when he was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, where he served until 2018. During his time in Congress, he was known for his conservative positions on various issues. In 2018, he won the gubernatorial race in Florida, positioning himself as a staunch defender of conservative values.
One of the most contentious aspects of DeSantis’s governorship has been his approach to education and the regulation of public discourse. His administration has implemented several policies that have drawn criticism from educators, historians, and civil rights advocates.
1. Book Bans and Educational Restrictions:
DeSantis has championed legislation that restricts the content available in schools and public libraries. These measures include banning books that deal with topics related to race, gender identity, and LGBTQ+ issues. Critics argue that these bans not only limit access to diverse perspectives but also undermine the educational mission of schools by promoting a narrow and exclusionary view of history and society. The most controversial of these policies are those that prevent the teaching of Black history, which many see as an effort to erase or whitewash the contributions and struggles of Black Americans.
2. Stance on LGBTQ+ Issues and Gender Identity:
DeSantis has also enacted policies that affect LGBTQ+ individuals, including measures aimed at restricting discussions of gender identity and sexuality in schools. These policies have been criticized for marginalizing LGBTQ+ students and failing to protect their rights and well-being. Critics argue that such policies contribute to a hostile environment and perpetuate stigma and discrimination.
3. Broader Implications:
The broader implications of DeSantis’s policies extend beyond education. They reflect a troubling trend toward censoring information and restricting the rights of marginalized communities. By implementing these policies, DeSantis’s administration promotes a version of history and culture that aligns with a specific ideological perspective, potentially marginalizing those who do not conform to this view.
Addressing the challenges posed by DeSantis’s policies requires a multifaceted approach:
1. Advocacy and Public Awareness:
Raising awareness about the impact of these policies is crucial. Advocacy groups, educators, and concerned citizens can work to highlight the detrimental effects of book bans and restrictions on education. Public campaigns and media coverage can help mobilize opposition and promote a more inclusive and accurate representation of history.
2. Legal Challenges and Legislative Action:
Legal challenges can be an effective way to contest policies that are perceived as unconstitutional or discriminatory. Advocacy groups and legal organizations can pursue litigation to challenge book bans and restrictions on educational content. Additionally, state and local legislators can introduce bills to counteract these restrictive policies and protect educational freedom and diversity.
3. Community Engagement and Electoral Participation:
Engaging with the political process at the local and state levels is essential. Voting in elections, participating in community meetings, and supporting candidates who advocate for inclusive policies can help shift the political landscape. Grassroots efforts can also play a significant role in building a more equitable and representative political system.
4. Support for Affected Individuals:
Providing support for individuals and communities affected by these policies is important. Organizations that focus on LGBTQ+ rights, racial justice, and educational equity can offer resources and support to those impacted by discriminatory practices. Creating safe spaces and providing platforms for marginalized voices can help counteract the negative effects of these policies.
Ron DeSantis’s policies and rhetoric have sparked significant debate and controversy, particularly concerning issues of race, gender, and education. His approach has been criticized for promoting exclusionary and discriminatory practices that undermine the principles of diversity and inclusion. Addressing these challenges requires a concerted effort involving advocacy, legal action, community engagement, and support for affected individuals. By working together to promote a more inclusive and equitable society, it is possible to counteract the negative effects of policies that seek to marginalize and censor.
|
SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 14TH, 2024
LIFE IS LIFE
By Sabri Bebawi ©
Edited by ChatGPT
Charles Aznavour’s reflection on life and happiness, encapsulated in his poetic lyrics, resonates deeply with our modern understanding of living in the moment. His message is a timeless reminder to embrace the present, celebrate it, and savor every experience as it comes. The sentiment that “The happy days are here and now; now is the time to love and live” offers a powerful lens through which we can view our lives, suggesting that the essence of happiness is found not in the past or future, but in the immediacy of the present moment.
In a world where people often find themselves preoccupied with regrets over yesterday or anxieties about tomorrow, Aznavour’s words challenge us to redirect our focus. The notion that “All yesterdays are dead and gone; tomorrow is so far away” serves as a poignant reminder of the futility in dwelling on what has been or worrying about what might be. This perspective encourages a shift from a mindset of lamentation or anticipation to one of active engagement with the present. By concentrating on the here and now, individuals can unlock a profound sense of fulfillment and joy that might otherwise be obscured by a fixation on the past or future.
The essence of Aznavour’s message is deeply rooted in the philosophy of mindfulness, which advocates for a heightened awareness of the present moment. Mindfulness research suggests that this approach can lead to significant improvements in overall well-being, including enhanced emotional stability, reduced stress, and increased satisfaction with life. When we live in the present, we are more likely to fully experience and appreciate the nuances of our daily lives, fostering a deeper connection with ourselves and others.
Aznavour’s call to “sing all the songs; drink all the wine that life can give” serves as an invitation to fully immerse oneself in the experiences of life. This is not merely about indulgence but rather about embracing the richness of life’s offerings. The metaphor of singing and drinking represents the act of celebrating life with enthusiasm and openness. It is an encouragement to seize moments of joy, to express ourselves freely, and to savor the simple pleasures that make life vibrant and meaningful.
Moreover, Aznavour’s emphasis on the present as a “happy day” underscores the idea that happiness is not a distant goal but a current reality to be acknowledged and appreciated. This perspective aligns with the concept of “living in the now,” which suggests that happiness is often found in the ordinary moments of everyday life rather than in grand, future achievements or possessions. By recognizing and valuing these moments, individuals can cultivate a more enduring sense of contentment and gratitude.
The challenge, then, is to overcome the natural human tendency to be preoccupied with what has been or what might come. To live in accordance with Aznavour’s philosophy requires a conscious effort to shift our focus. This might involve practices such as mindfulness, gratitude exercises, or simply making a deliberate effort to engage with the present moment. It also involves a willingness to let go of regrets and anxieties, accepting that the only time we truly have is now.
In conclusion, Charles Aznavour’s lyrical advice serves as a powerful reminder of the importance of living in the present. His words encapsulate a philosophy that encourages us to celebrate the here and now, to fully engage with life’s experiences, and to recognize the present moment as a source of happiness. By embracing this perspective, we can find a more profound and lasting sense of joy and fulfillment, allowing us to live each day with greater richness and appreciation.
|
SUTURDAY, SEPTEMBER 14TH, 2024
The American Congress, as a body vested with legislative powers, plays a fundamental role in shaping the laws and policies of the United States. Its mandate is to represent the people, uphold justice, and ensure that the government serves the common good. However, over the years, there has been growing concern over corruption, unethical behavior, and a perceived erosion of morals within Congress. This situation has not only undermined public trust in the institution but has also contributed to political polarization and dysfunction in Washington, D.C.
The Influence of Money in PoliticsThe Influence of Money in Politics
One of the most glaring issues contributing to corruption in Congress is the influence of money in politics. The U.S. political system, especially since the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. FEC in 2010, has allowed for an almost unrestricted flow of corporate and special interest money into elections. Super PACs and dark money groups can raise unlimited funds to influence campaigns, and while these contributions are often presented as a form of free speech, they tend to distort the democratic process. Lawmakers, who depend on these funds to secure their seats, may feel beholden to wealthy donors and lobbyists rather than the constituents they were elected to serve.
The result is a system where the voices of ordinary citizens are drowned out by those with deep pockets. Large corporations, interest groups, and influential industries such as healthcare, defense, and energy can often sway legislation to their favor. Policies that should prioritize public welfare—such as healthcare reform, environmental regulations, or corporate taxation—are frequently diluted or blocked altogether. This leads to the perception, and often the reality, that many members of Congress prioritize personal or party gains over the well-being of the nation.
Revolving Doors and LobbyingRevolving Doors and Lobbying
A related issue is the revolving door between Congress and lobbying firms. Many former members of Congress transition seamlessly into lucrative lobbying positions after their political careers. This practice raises ethical concerns because it creates an incentive for lawmakers to craft legislation that benefits specific industries, knowing that they may later profit from those same industries. The ease with which members of Congress can leverage their political experience for financial gain after leaving office suggests a conflict of interest that compromises their ability to act in the public's best interest while in office.
Lobbying itself is not inherently corrupt; it is a way for various stakeholders to present their cases to lawmakers. However, when access to lawmakers is contingent upon financial contributions or when former politicians use their influence to manipulate legislative outcomes, it becomes a corrosive force that undermines democracy. This phenomenon reinforces a culture of self-interest within Congress, where decisions are often made based on personal financial incentives rather than moral or ethical considerations.
In addition to financial corruption, the extreme partisanship that has come to define American politics is another symptom of Congress' moral decline. Over the past few decades, the two major political parties have become increasingly polarized, to the point where compromise and bipartisan cooperation are seen as political liabilities. In this environment, loyalty to party and ideology often takes precedence over the duty to serve the nation or represent constituents fairly. The result is legislative gridlock, where important issues such as immigration reform, gun control, and climate change remain unresolved due to partisan bickering.
This hyper-partisanship has not only paralyzed the legislative process but has also eroded moral standards within Congress. Some members have become willing to engage in dishonesty, demagoguery, or fear-mongering to maintain power and appeal to their base. The moral fabric of governance, which should be characterized by integrity, transparency, and accountability, is instead being torn apart by a culture that rewards manipulation, deception, and the pursuit of personal or partisan gains at the expense of the greater good.
Lack of AccountabilityAnother factor contributing to corruption and moral erosion in Congress is the lack of accountability. While there are systems in place to investigate and penalize unethical behavior, they are often weak, slow, or compromised by political considerations. Congressional ethics committees, for example, have been criticized for being too lenient on their colleagues or for allowing partisan bias to influence their decisions. High-profile corruption cases, where members of Congress have been found guilty of accepting bribes, insider trading, or other forms of malfeasance, have shown that such behaviors often go unchecked for far too long.
Moreover, members of Congress enjoy certain privileges that further insulate them from the consequences of unethical behavior. Gerrymandering, for example, allows many incumbents to remain in power by manipulating district boundaries to ensure re-election, regardless of their performance or ethical conduct. As long as members feel secure in their seats, they may feel less pressure to behave ethically or be responsive to their constituents' needs.
Addressing the corruption and lack of morals in Congress requires systemic reforms. One key solution is campaign finance reform. Reducing the influence of money in politics is critical to restoring a sense of fairness and equity in the legislative process. Stricter limits on campaign donations, increased transparency in political contributions, and the creation of publicly funded election systems would help ensure that lawmakers are accountable to the people, not just wealthy donors.
Additionally, stronger regulations on lobbying and a more stringent ethical code for members of Congress are necessary to curb the revolving door and conflicts of interest. Lawmakers should be prohibited from accepting positions with lobbying firms or industries they once regulated for a reasonable period after leaving office.
Finally, promoting a culture of bipartisanship and compromise is crucial to restoring the moral standing of Congress. This can be achieved by creating incentives for cooperation and discouraging hyper-partisan behavior. Mechanisms like independent redistricting commissions can prevent gerrymandering, ensuring that lawmakers face fair and competitive elections that encourage them to be more responsive to their constituents rather than their party.
The current state of the American Congress, characterized by corruption and moral decline, presents a significant threat to the functioning of democracy. The influence of money, the revolving door between Congress and lobbying firms, extreme partisanship, and a lack of accountability have eroded public trust in the institution. Restoring morality and trust in Congress requires comprehensive reforms that prioritize transparency, accountability, and the public interest. Without these changes, Congress will continue to serve the interests of a select few, rather than the people it was meant to represent.
|
SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 15TH, 2024 ©
It’s late at night, and I’m taking a break from finishing the last chapter of my book. I’m looking to write something soothing and heartfelt, something that genuinely reflects my inner thoughts. I feel a gentle current of energy running through me, like pleasurable electric shocks. Then, it all changes and this happens:
Whether it's a hallucination or a glimpse of reality, it’s hard to say for certain. It’s 2025, and I find myself as an unseen observer in the Oval Office at the White House. I’m watching a bizarre and disturbing game unfold. There are many people present playing a deadly game of chance, but three individuals seem to be in control of the game: Donald Trump at the presidential desk, Vladimir Putin to his right, and Kim Jong Un to his left. On the desk, there’s a revolver and a handful of bullets.
The game they are orchestrating is a deadly round of Russian Roulette. One of the three presidents loads a single bullet into the revolver, spinning the cylinder; the players who are the people present take turns forced to place the muzzle against their heads before pulling the trigger. Meanwhile, Trump, Putin, and Kim Jong Un are drinking, smoking cigars, and placing large bets on the outcome. The floor is strewn with lifeless bodies, a grim testament to the game's deadly stakes. It is like a scene from the film “The Deer Hunter.” (1979)
|
Monday, SEPTEMBER 16TH, 2024
In my quest to indict God for crimes against humanity, I embark on a fervent exploration of faith. ©
Troubled by the state of the world, I took on the role of prosecutor against God. In my novel, A Dream Is Just That (2011), I am the unnamed protagonist, reflecting on my life’s trials. I vividly recall suffering from a severe fever during my otherwise pleasant childhood in the “exotic, confused, and utterly blurred world of Egypt.” Decades later, as a California-based English professor vacationing in Paris, I experienced an inexplicable leg seizure that vanished as suddenly as it appeared.
These seizures grew more frequent and distressing, adding to my lifelong insomnia, which left me fearing hallucinations. While others might count sheep to fall asleep, I find myself “counting the number of wars that have taken place before and after my birth.” Amidst a world seemingly unraveling, with notable events like the exile of NSA leaker Edward Snowden, I feel compelled to put God on trial. I imagine prosecuting God in absentia before the Human Rights Council for crimes against humanity.
I scrutinize the Torah and the Old Testament, citing them as “the original texts of bloodbath” due to their retributive and violent themes, and find similar incitements in the Quran. My obsession deepens, prompting concern from my wife, friends, and colleagues as my investigation becomes increasingly elaborate. I tally the “atrocities against humanity” allegedly committed by this unseen entity—wars, plagues, famines—and discover little reduction in these offenses, even in the supposedly more peaceful New Testament. I conclude that “God’s nature has always been vindictive, abusive, and violent.”
Through a labyrinth of mysteries and legal arguments, my writing accelerates toward a compelling and unexpectedly spiritual conclusion. The narrative offers profound insights for both believers and skeptics, presented in a fluid and gripping manner (Based on Kirkus Reviews) © “God on Trial” is a must-read for anyone seeking a deeper understanding of the human experience. This book challenges the reader to reconsider their perspectives and opens up discussions on faith and morality.
|
Monday, SEPTEMBER 16TH, 2024
TRUMP, HITLER AND STALIN
SABRI BEBAWI ©
EDITED BY CHATGPT
While it is crucial to acknowledge the significant differences between Donald Trump, Adolf Hitler, and Joseph Stalin—particularly in terms of the scale of their crimes and the historical contexts in which they operated—the comparisons offer important lessons. Each leader’s ability to manipulate media, foster division, and challenge democratic institutions provides insights into how authoritarianism can rise and thrive even in seemingly stable societies. The comparison also underscores the importance of vigilance in protecting democratic norms, human rights, and the rule of law in the face of leaders who seek to undermine them for personal or political gain.
Hitler: The Nazi regime’s scapegoating of Jews, Roma, homosexuals, and other marginalized groups is perhaps the most notorious example of this tactic. Hitler's anti-Semitic rhetoric turned an entire ethnic group into the source of all societal ills, leading to the Holocaust, one of the darkest chapters in human history. Trump does the same agains foreigners.
Stalin: Stalin, too, used scapegoating as a political tool, though his targets were often political rivals, intellectuals, and so-called "enemies of the people." The purges of the 1930s, known as the Great Terror, resulted in the execution or imprisonment of millions. Stalin justified these actions as necessary to protect the Soviet Union from internal and external threats, painting anyone who opposed him as a counter-revolutionary. Trump aspires to do the same.
Trump: Trump’s use of scapegoating centered around immigrants, political opponents, and the media. His rhetoric around the southern border, in which he frequently depicted immigrants as criminals, rapists, and invaders, mirrored the us-vs-them narrative employed by both Hitler and Stalin. Additionally, Trump’s frequent demonization of political opponents as "corrupt" or "treasonous" created an environment of heightened political polarization.
|