Reagan Told US in 1983 NOT to "Both Sides" In The Face Of Evil

[Video excerpted from speech to National Association of Evangelicals, March 8, 1983.  Full speech available here.]

While Reagan was distinguishing between the United States and the Soviet Union, he was warning people not to step back and treat both sides as equal.  He was saying the US was on the side of good and the Soviet Union was on the side of evil and you can't just offer both sides as equally worthy.  

Today we have a Democratic Party, with all its inconsistencies and flaws, basically standing for the United States and the freedoms and the democracy that were established in the US Constitution.  Opposing it are the Republican Party, essentially a cult ruled by a leader who has ties to Reagan's evil empire*, who lies, who makes false accusation, who foments violence, who favors white nationalism and fascism, and who is attempting to tear down the US Constitution and the US Government.  

United States journalists have long argued for 'objective' reporting of the news. It's part of the Society of Professional Journalists' code of ethics.  

"Support the open and civil exchange of views, even views they find repugnant."

Generally, this has meant both major political parties are given equal time, and 'responsible' spokespersons for different sides of an issue are cited.   

But when one of the major political parties has become anti-democratic and does so with lies and misinformation that obfuscates and distracts from the important issues, then both sides journalism exacerbates the problem. They are basically polluting the public forum.  Much of the media has yet to adjust to this change in the Republican party.  

The media still  try to 'objectively' present opposing arguments.  Even when one side favors the basic principles and freedoms in our Constitution and the other side would ignore the Constitution when it conflicts with their goals.  

I think I'm being a bit generous here, ascribing this presenting of both sides equally as an attempt to be 'objective.'  

Despite indisputable evidence that the Republican party has become an anti-democracy cult, many mainstream media treat both parties as though the were equally valid points of view.  

This is like giving the pro-slavery side equal time with the equal rights side. "Well, now let's consider the upsides of slavery."  Oh, yeah, I forgot.t Republicans have actually done that.    Or like giving the child pornography proponents equal time and respect to the anti-child pornography side.  

Many Evangelical Christians are among those who are supporting this anti-American, pro-Trump voice. 

So I just wanted to offer this warning from one of their heroes - Ronald Reagan - against both-sidesing issues.  The video above comes from a speech to  the National Association of Evangelicals on March 8, 1983.  [And it appears that those loyal to Reagan are losing favor in Trump's GOP.]

Here's more of Reagan's comments from the transcript of that speech.

"So, in your discussions of the nuclear freeze proposals, I urge you to beware the temptation of pride–the temptation of blithely..uh..declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil."

There is more that is not in the clip I have at the top, but in the full speech. Reagan (below) is supporting the rights of 'minority citizens,' he's arguing against racism and anti-semitism, something else the Republicans today no longer agree with.

There is sin and evil in the world, and we’re enjoined by Scripture and the Lord Jesus to oppose it with all our might. Our nation, too, has a legacy of evil with which it must deal. The glory of this land has been its capacity for transcending the moral evils of our past. For example, the long struggle of minority citizens…for equal rights, once a source of disunity and civil war is now a point of pride for all Americans. We must never go back. There is no room for racism, anti-Semitism, or other forms of ethnic and racial hatred in this country. [Long Applause]

I know that you’ve been horrified, as have I, by the resurgence of some hate groups preaching bigotry and prejudice. Use the mighty voice of your pulpits and the powerful standing of your churches to denounce and isolate these hate groups in our midst. The commandment given us is clear and simple: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” [Applause]

Reagan is not a president I admire, for many reasons.  I don't endorse mucht of this speech.  And it's tricky to quote parts that appear to support the point you are making.  

But Reagan is clearly telling this Evangelical audience that when there is a clear choice between good and evil, treating both sides with equal respect, as though they are equally valid, is wrong.  

We're there now, yet media are giving Trump prime time interviews.  And often using Right Wing lies as counterbalance to stories on President Biden.  

I think they understand these are not normal times and the old rules don't work, because one side doesn't follow any rules, other than obeisance to Trump.  They are trying to figure out how to report in these perilous times.   

I think they are also carefully looking at their bottom line and calculating the number of eyeballs and clicks the GOP crime scene will generate for them.  

*I'd note that Reagan was talking about the Soviet Union which has been replaced by Russia.  But much of the evil still exists.  Putin was spawned by the Soviet KGB.  And just watching the destruction of Ukraine by Russia makes it clear that Russia is ruled by an inhumane war criminal.  

I'd also like to acknowledge that I discovered the Reagan clip while watching the Netflix series SpyOps, Episode 3, Operation Pimlico.

"There lies the main difference between childish imaginings and imaginative literature."

 

From Ursula LeGuin's No Time To Spare, a book of essays that chews on topics from old age to writing.  In "It Doesn't Have to Be the Way It Is"(June 2022) she muses about what liberties storytellers can take with reality before losing their readers.  

"The fantastic tale may suspend the laws of physics - carpets fly; cats fade into invisibility, leaving only a smile - and of probability - the younger of three brothers wins the bride, the infant in the box cast upon the waters survives unharmed - but it carries its revolt against reality no further.  Mathematical order is unquestioned.  Two and one make three, in Koschei's castle and Alice's Wonderland (especially in Wonderland), Euclid's geometry - or possibly Riemann's - somebody's geometry, anyhow - governs the layout.  Otherwise incoherence would invade and paralyze the narrative.  

There lies the main difference between childish imaginings and imaginative literature.  The chid "telling a story" roams about among the imaginary and the half-understood without knowing the difference, content with the sound of language and the pure play of fantasy with no particular end, and that's the charm of it.  But fantasies, whether folktales or sophisticated literature, are stories in the adult,  demanding sense.  They can ignore certain laws of physics but not of causality.  They start here and go there (or back here), and though the mode of travel may be unusual and here and there may be wildly exotic and unfamiliar places, yet they must have both a location on the map of that world and a relationship to the map of our world.  If not, the hearer or reader of the tale will be set adrift in a sea of inconsequential inconsistencies, or, worse yet, left drowning in the shallow puddle of the author's wishful thinking."

I don't know how many of you, reading this, were spurred to think about how childish Trump's stories are.  What's charming in children's stories definitely doesn't age well when told by adults.  

And what does this tell us by Trump's audience?  

"The hearer . . . of the tale will be set adrift in a sea of inconsequential inconsistencies, or worse yet, left drowning in the shallow puddle of the author's wishful thinking."

To be fair, LeGuin does distinguish between oral and written story telling.   In the previous essay, "The Narrative Gift as a Moral Conundrum" (May 2022) she writes:

"Storytelling is clearly a gift, a talent, a specific ability.  Some people just don't have it - they rush or drone, jumble the order of events, skip essentials, dwell on inessentials, and the muff the climax.  Don't we all have a relative who we pray won't launch into a joke or a bit of family history because the history will bore us and the joke will bomb?  But we may also have a relative who can take the stupidest, nothingest little event and make it into what copywriters call a gut-wrenchingly brilliant thriller and laugh riot."

While Trump does have a presence, I'm not sure he fits this description of story teller either.  It's more like he embodies the misery of his followers and allows them to act out their frustrations and blame their problems on anyone but themselves.  Trump was, up to a point, the successful version, or their own angry selves.  

 

Bookwriting Finally Comes To A Close

 I put together a picture/story book for my granddaughter when she turned two.  I intended to have one for my grandson when he turned two.  But life got more complicated and my original story ideas seemed lame and then the muse move out.  He's turning seven in June and I've just about finished his adventure book now.  I tried to put up the last picture on the back cover, but it wouldn't go.  I used the same online publisher (Zno) used for my granddaughter and I'm doing the same product.  But it's change a bit - square instead of rectangular, and 20 pages instead of 16.  The file goes up on the regular pages and I'm concerned that they no longer do back covers.  The email is in.  

The point of all this is:  I've spent a lot of time on the computer in the last couple of weeks as the finish line came into sight.  And various blog posts have not gotten up.  

I'd offer you a page or two from the book, but he should get it and see it before that happens.  I'm guessing it will take several weeks to get printed and out to him.  Also he's on most of the pages and there's an edict from my kids that grandkids' pics don't go on the blog.  Even with the face blurred.  

So you'll have to trust me that there are cool pics of M being caught in a spider web with a nasty looking spider, carried in the mouth of a T-Rex, riding on the back of a butterfly, and in other scary adventures.  There all based on pictures I took or in one case another family member took and a lot of Photoshop magic.  I have learned some new Photoshop tricks.  I was reminded how pretty much anything you want to know is available online.  I googled something like "How to show a candle lighting a cave" and that took me to a video tape of how to make a cave and show the glow of a candle.  

I've also learned that you can save a layer directly to another photoshop file.  And several new keyboard shortcuts.  

My granddaughter has been a consultant on this project.  She originally lent me one of her shirts when I needed an alligator (there was one on the shirt.)  And she reviewed the pages (FaceTime) and  giggled at the right places and assured me it wasn't too scary.   The other day she said the maze (for getting out of the cave) was too simple.  So I asked her to make me a harder one.  And, now that I think of it, I can show you that one.  Hers was pencil on off white paper.  

There was a lot of new learning as I had to figure out thinks like how to place the pages so that 1) the two pages side by side were compatible and one page didn't ruin the next, and 2) so that the "The End" page would end up on the right side.  

So there's one grandchild left who needs a book in the next few years.  

Time Travel Is Real - The First Time Trump Offered To Save Everyone By Building A Wall

I used to think that imaginative fiction writers (especially science-fiction) were the ones who thought up new ideas and possibilities that less imaginative, but technically competent, engineers would eventually make real.  Things like Dick Tracy's radio watch or sliding automatic doors and other inventions.

But after seeing this excerpt from a 1958 TV show featuring a con-man named Trump who scams a whole town into believing he can save them from the end of the world by building them a wall. .

Well now I'm sure it was the other way around.  Time travelers went into the past and used their knowledge of the future to write stories like this one.  He was warning us back then.

What the fresh hell. This is REAL. Filmed in 1958- about a conman who grifts a small town of suckers into building a wall. History not subtle enough for you? GUESS THE GRIFTER'S NAME
(And watch until the end) pic.twitter.com/6FA3p6KC00

— Alex Hirsch (@_AlexHirsch) January 9, 2019

Here's the whole episode for people looking for ways to avoid doing what they should be doing.  You'll see how skeptics were scorned and even used to increase people's gullibility.  How people lost all reason to fear.

About Pulling Out Of Syria

[I'm thinking out loud here, trying to bring disparate thoughts together.  Bear with me.]

It's not at all clear to me the costs and benefits of the US having troops in Syria.  I think finding ways to pull out of places like Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and ending support of the Saudi war in Yemen are important goals.

Ro Khanna, a Democratic member of congress from California, in this Washington Post piece,  supports President Trump's instinct to pull out of Syria, though he argues we need to do it in a way better coordinated with our allies, and in a way that uses leverage over Turkey's Erdogan that keeps him from massacring Kurds in the area.

He also mentions,

"We have spent more money in Afghanistan than we did in the Marshall Plan and continue to spend more than $40 billion each year."

The Marshall Plan helped Western Europe rebuild after the destruction of WW II.  It help lift their economy so Western Europe could help us defend against the Soviet Union as the Cold War ramped up and so they could buy American products, which helped repay what we spent.

Imagine $40 billion a year.  What could the US have spent that money on?  Helping with education and economic development in Central America so that the people there could make a living and build safe lives, so they wouldn't feel the need to flee over the US border.

Think of the US veterans who wouldn't be suffering from PTSD and other serious ailments, not to mention missing body parts.  War is only good for people who make money selling guns, planes, tanks, technology, and all the support items needed for soldiers to live and fight and die.

Think about all the fossil fuel that would not have been used. And how global warming would have been a little bit slower.   The Union of Concerned Scientists write:

"The U.S. military is the largest institutional consumer of oil in the world. Every year, our armed forces consume more than 100 million barrels of oil to power ships, vehicles, aircraft, and ground operations—enough for over 4 million trips around the Earth, assuming 25 mpg."

According to Wired, $40 billion a year is only 2/3 of what's needed to rebuild our infrastructure.

" $1 trillion sounds great, but it ain't enough, not if the country wants to keeping fixing roads ten years down the line. According a US Department of Transportation report, just maintaining current highways and bridges through 2030 will cost a cool $65.3 billion—per year. That’s being conservative."

You get the point.  If the Soviet Union, which borders Afghanistan could take control, how can the US do it from half-way around the world away?

Unfortunately, few people, and I know this includes many members of congress, don't have a comprehensive understanding of the factors involved in wars like the ones we're involved in.  We originally went to Afghanistan to punish those who killed 2,955 people on 9/11, 2605 of whom were American citizens.

Brown University's Cost of War study offers this summary of what we've unleashed* in return:

SUMMARY

• Over 480,000 have died due to direct war violence, and several times as many indirectly

• Over 244,000 civilians have been killed as a result of the fighting

• 21 million — the number of war refugees and displaced persons

• The US federal price tag for the post-9/11 wars is over $5.9 trillion dollars

• The US government is conducting counterterror activities in 76 countries

• The wars have been accompanied by violations of human rights and civil liberties, in the US and abroad

READ ALL FINDINGS

*I say 'unleashed' because the US forces didn't kill all these civilians, but the wars we've engaged in have.

Saddam Hussein was a ruthless leader.  Getting actual figures of the number of people his regime killed - civilians and and conscripted soldiers - is not easy.  As I look, numbers range in the hundreds of thousands - at least 300,000 and probably significantly more than that.  Some sources:

• State Department Summary
• The Scotsman
• Wikipedia

Surely, there are people alive who wouldn't be if we hadn't invaded Iraq.  But there are also people who are dead, who wouldn't be if we hadn't invaded Iraq.

I'd note this Brookings Institute (a liberal leaning think tank) prediction from 2002 about the costs of getting into a war with Iraq which I found while getting data for this post:

An invasion to overthrow Saddam Hussein would likely cost the United States about $50 billion, though it could plausibly range from $25 billion to $75 billion or so, with likely annual U.S. costs of maintaining order in Iraq ranging from $5 billion to $20 billion for a number of years thereafter. The latter costs of winning the peace, and associated wear and tear on American military personnel, may actually turn out to be a greater concern than the one-time cost of winning the war.

If only it had been so 'cheap.'

My point is, again, that the number of people who actually have looked closely at all the costs and benefits - economic, human, political, opportunity costs - is relatively few.  I'm not in that group.

It's clear to me though, that the money spent "fighting terrorism" could have been better spent creating opportunities for human beings - education, health care, economic development.  These kinds of initiatives would have created positive changes in people's lives and put the United States and the world in a much better place than it is now.

It's time people went back and read some of the old stories we were supposed to learn simple truths from.  For instance the story of B'rer Rabbit and the Tar Baby might be an apt story for the United States' war on terrorism.





I'd note that many such old stories are seen today as sexist or racist.  I suspected people hadfound reason to question the Uncle Remus stories.  So  I checked and they have.  But it's hard not to be racist if you grow up in the United States even today.  Joel Chandler Harris was born just before the Civil War in the South, so surely he had lots of racist tendencies.  But all that considering, it seems he was pretty progressive for his times, and the Uncle Remus stories seem to be a tribute to an old black slave Harris looked up to.  See this Pittsburgh Gazette article on Harris' life.

In The Unbelievably Racist World of Classic Children's Lit,   Malcolm Jones writes:

"The case of Joel Chandler Harris is particularly relevant in this regard. A lifelong southerner and an Atlanta newspaper editor (and incidentally a friend of Twain’s), Harris was probably as enlightened as a white person could be in his time and place. If you read his Uncle Remus stories, you’ll see that to Harris, Uncle Remus was a hero. He’s certainly the smartest and kindest person, black or white, in the narrative that frames the folk tales collected by the author from former slaves.
More important, had Harris not collected those folktales, we almost surely would have missed much of a vast trove of oral storytelling (“our most precious piece of stolen goods,” Twain called them—so that’s what we were getting away with!), because before Harris, no one else had the sense to realize how wonderful those stories were, much less that they should be recorded for posterity. Whatever sins he may have been guilty of, Harris knew at least that much. James Weldon Johnson called the 185 stories published by Harris 'the greatest body of folklore America has produced.'”  

He's not as kind to Disney's Song of the South, from which this clip was taken.

None of this changes my belief that the sooner we get Trump out of the presidency the better for the world and the United States.  And the Republicans who have had control of both houses of Congress since Trump became president, share the blame, because they haven't done their job as a check on the criminal* who is in the White House.

*I think that anyone who looks at the Trump organization and Trump objectively has to acknowledge that he has abused our laws repeatedly.

My Voting Reform Fantasy - A Short Story

It's two months before the election in the not-to-distant future.  She had three more days to take the voting test.  She'd looked on line and studied all the questions and the answers.  She was excited.

It had taken years, but when people realized what Alaska was ike after four years of Dunleavy, the reform movement began.  People realized that knowing something about a candidate's past, and knowing something about how things worked, made you a better voter.  Things like how a trust fund works, or how much an income tax would cost most people compared to a Permanent Fund check.  Like knowing what the budget was before they said it was too much and needed to be cut.  Like understanding what services government provides people BEFORE they get cut.  And understanding the link between potholes and the cost of car repairs, between crime and insurance rates.   Like understanding the costs of a good school system compared to the cost of any prison system and how those costs are related.  Just knowing the size of the population and understanding how to figure out costs per capita.

So finally, Alaskans passed new voter registration rules.  Everyone could still register to vote.  But you also had the option of taking a bi-partisan approved factual exam.  The more answers you got right, the more your vote counted.  It could count one time if you didn't do very well, two times if you got half the questions right, and three times if you 90% of the questions right.

No, Alaskans hadn't gotten rid of the one person one vote rule.  The extra votes didn't change the election.  But along with the actual one vote per person results, Alaskans got to see what the results would have been if informed people got two votes and very well informed people got three votes.

So she took the test and instantly learned that she was rated "informed."  She was looking forward to the results of this experiment.  Would it make a difference?  Would the people of Kivalina, (who are in a lawsuit over  the loss of their village due to climate change)  vote for a climate change denier instead of a a strong advocate of slowing down climate change if they knew the facts?  Would knowing the facts change people's voting?  (Kivalina example from a FB message from Elstun Lausen.)

Arctic Entries - Then And Now - Alaska Story Tellers Share Their Stories

Back in November 2010 we went to see and hear something called Arctic Entries - seven story tellers each with seven minutes to tell their stories.  It was a Cyrano's (the original theater on D St) that held about 90 people.

Here's what it looked like back then at Cyrano's:

Image from the 2010 post on Arctic Entries

Like most things at the old Cyrano's stage, it was intimate.  The guy on stage in the picture is Max [Matt] Rafferty who was one of the hosts this week.  He was stepping down from that role, saying the speakers get seven minutes and he's had seven years.  So he thinks it's time. [UPDATE May 14, 2018:  Barbara Brown has become my new editor, letting me know when typos slip in here.  Thank you Barbara!  I do appreciate it.  Memory is a weird thing.  All I can think of is that Max Rafferty was a politician in California long ago and my fingers without my knowing replaced Matt with Max.  Not even a politician I liked.]


We'd heard it had grown a lot - so much so that tickets at the Discovery theater sold out in minutes.  That seemed like too much work.  But I heard the last one of the season would be held in the Atwood Concert Hall (holds around 1900) so I checked on tickets when I had to go downtown anyway.  I got two tickets, in the upper balcony was all that were left.

Arctic Entries has seven story tellers tell seven minute stories each evening.  They have to be their own stories of their own experiences.  Those are the basic rules.  These are generally everyday folks, not professional story tellers.

The image is from before the story telling began.  The place got packed.  They said it held 1900 people.

They also had a band - Blackwater Railroad from Seward.

But the stories were compelling, even from so far away.  It just wasn't possible to find and talk to individual story tellers afterward.

The theme was "Timelapse" and each story teller represented a different decade.  It began with 2000s and went back to the 1970's.  Then after intermission, it went in the other direction - 1940's to 1960's.

The group was diverse!  Adil Raja is a Pakistani immigrant who talked about winding up in Anchorage and falling in love with Alaska.

Mao Tosi, born in American Samoa, moved to Anchorage as a child, got into sports in high school and spent a couple of years in the NFL until he got injured.  Then he came back to Anchorage and became a community organizer.  He told about how his parents left him, when he was in junior high, to live with his 19 year old brother.  It was through sports and people at school and in the community that he kept away from drugs and graduated from high school.  His message was that the love of strangers that 'saved' him is important and we should all share our love.

Penny Scales Fairbanks is a Fairbanks hairdresser and she was recruited by one of the Arctic Entries organizer after hearing the story when she got her hair done.  She talked about how her brother told her he was gay in the 1980s, living in California.  And then that he was HIV+ and wanted help in telling their parents, and how her father's attitude changed while they were in California being with her brother while he was dying.

Donna Walker, Alaska's current first lady, talked about coming to Alaska in 1976 right after graduating from college to become a recreation director at an Alaska pipeline construction camp in Glennallen.  From there she took a similar job in Valdez where she met Bill Walker.  She said before getting married, she told him she wanted four kids and he said he did too.  Later he admitted that however many kids she said she wanted he would have given the same answer.

Then there was intermission and we moved forward from the 1940's.

Margaret Anderson, born in 1933, talked about growing up in Seward in the 30's and 40's.  On the one hand she said it was a great life for kids back then, but on the other hand, she said she couldn't wait to get on the ship out after high school.  But she came back to Seward and packed her seven minutes with lots of stories.

Carmel Walder talked about spending time with her grandmother in SE Alaska while her parents were having trouble and there she learned about order and calm and harvesting herring eggs and fishing.  She went back to her parents and more chaos, but staying at grandmother's had shown her there was another way to live and she graduated from high school and made a life which now includes her own grandchildren.

And finally, we had Paul Ongtooguk who grew up in Nome and was put into a program in the 1960s where Alaska Native kids were sent to white Christian families to live.  He was sent to Oklahoma.  As disturbed as that program was, he did see another life and got through college and has worked at the University of Alaska Anchorage for many years.


At the end of the program, the hosts unfurled a huge check - no one gets paid for working at Arctic Entries and all the proceeds go to Alaska organizations.  The fall non-profit partner was Hospice and the spring 2018 partner is the Refugee Assistance and Immigration Service (RAIS).  I looked on their website to try to find more on the checks, but couldn't.  I think there was a check for close to $20,000!

Arctic Entries website is here.  And at another page you can find links to most of their old story tellers.  (A few in the first year are missing, presumably they weren't recorded.)

Powerful Two Sentence Story

This is one powerful short story.


From Thought Catalogue's post on two sentence short stories:

I begin tucking him into bed and he tells me, “Daddy check for monsters under my bed.” I look underneath for his amusement and see him, another him, under the bed, staring back at me quivering and whispering, “Daddy there’s somebody on my bed.”

The whole post is titled, "40 Freaking Creepy-Ass Two Sentence Stories" and this is one is probably the best.  As you go through them, many share a similar theme.

AIFF 2017: I Just Need To Tell Everyone How Amazing "The Drawer Boy" Was

I'd heard from some programmers that The Drawer Boy was good.  The trailer looked promising and the fact that it was an adaptation of the most produced Canadian play was promising.

It was very good.  A group of actors descends on this dusty rural Canadian farm community.  Miles knocks on the door of a farm house and tells the man who answers that he's an actor and his group has come from Toronto to learn about farmers and write a play about farmers.  He needs a place to stay and in exchange he'll be a free farmhand.

But then near the end was as powerful a scene as I can recall watching.  I was pulled right out of my seat in the theater and into the story on the screen as I watched the drama unfold, the untold story pried out of Morgan's heart.  I wasn't in the theater any more; I was in that farmhouse kitchen sitting on the edge of my chair next to Miles wondering what was coming next.

I don't understand why this film was scheduled only once.  I'm hoping that it wins an award and is shown again as part of Best of The Fest.  There have been some very good films in the festival, but this one is more than special.

I know I owe you more of an explanation, but I'm still processing.  I can offer you the film's director, Aviva Armour-Ostroff answering questions after the showing.

Rushdie,Reality, Symbols, Stories, Truth, , and ACA

Salman Rushdie's Two Years Eight Months and Twenty-Eight Nights seems to have understood the 'strangeness' that we are going through.  His novel suggests jinns are reeking havoc, but as I've been struggling to bring some sense to this post on ACA, this snippet from page 111, seems to focus on the underlying story of the battle over ACA (and everything else.)

"We were all trapped in stories, she said, just as he used to say, his wavy hair, his naughty smile, his beautiful mind, each us the prisoners of our own solipsistic narrative, each family the captive of the family story, each community locked within its own tale of itself, each people the victims of their own versions of history, and there were parts of the world where the narratives collided and went to war, where there were two or more incompatible stories fighting for space on, to speak, the same page."

The ACA seems to be where the Republican and Democratic narratives collided and went to war.  There were other things that raised hackles, but this was where pride and power broke out into full scale war.

And now repealing ACA is the Confederate flag of the right, a symbol of what holds them all together, and also reveals the myth of that togetherness.  

The Republican narrative on Obamacare has mostly been symbolic:

• The Biggest Insurance Scam in History
• “because of Obamacare, Medicare is going broke.” 
• One of Worst Policy Disasters in U.S. History
•  ". . .ObamaCare is already raising costs and eliminating jobs." McConnell
• 'death panels'

Obamacare symbolized a number of things to their narratives.

• Republican power slipping away
• Runaway government intrusion and spending
• The loss of personal responsibility - the concern that the socialist state would strip people's work ethic, and the mandate forcing people to buy something they might not want
• A black president getting his way
• A rallying cry to their base

It didn't matter that Obamacare was based on Republican ideas for health care that Romney had put in place in Massachusetts.

But Congress is now . . . I wanted to say  "a fact free zone."  But that's not quite true.  There are lots of 'facts' (something that can be proven true or false*) floating around.  Then I wanted to say "a truth free zone."  But there is plenty of truth floating around too.  It's more accurate to say that there just aren't any trusted referees in congress who have the authority to  analyze and determine what is and is not true.  Each person's sees and validates what confirms his narrative.  There's no one arbiter to examine the various narratives and test them for how closely they reflect how the world actually works.

By January 2014, Politico reports the Republicans made 48 attempts to repeal Obamacare.

"It's [repealing Obamacare] pretty high on our agenda as you know," the Kentucky Republican said on Wednesday. "I would be shocked if we didn't move forward and keep our commitment to the American people."

Is Obamacare perfect?   Far from it.  Some states are down to a single insurer.  But Republicans wouldn't allow there to be competition from public insurance providers.  Because of this and other issues (like each state being a separate market) costs for some are prohibitively expensive for policies that are insurance in name only.

On the other hand, tens of millions of people are now insured who weren't insured before.  People with prior conditions can get insurance.  Children in college stay on their parents' plans until they are 26.  Mental health and addiction care is available.

Republicans complain about mandates, but nearly every state requires car insurance.  The exceptions, from Wikipedia:

"States that do not require the vehicle owner to carry car insurance include Virginia, where an uninsured motor vehicle fee may be paid to the state; New Hampshire, and Mississippi which offers vehicle owners the option to post cash bonds (see below)."

But car insurancecom notes in 2016:

"Every state requires that you meet financial responsibility requirements through insurance, a bond or some other approved means that show you are able to pay if you cause damages to another person or property in an automobile accident.
Each state renews its laws annually, so some states that had no insurance requirements in the past now do. New Hampshire probably has the least amount of requirements -- and it still requires that you immediately show proof of financial responsibility if you've been involved in a car accident."

I'd note that Republicans dominate state legislatures and governorships.   They could end mandatory car insurance in most states if they are as opposed to mandatory insurance as they claim.  They would argue that in a car you could hurt others, whereas lack of health insurance just hurts you.  But that neglects the health hazards of infectious diseases, not to mention the long term costs to everyone of not taking care of health issues early on.  Or the fact that some people could not buy insurance even if they could afford it.

So now enough Republicans have heeded their constituents who are saying that this or that part of Obamacare needs to be kept, that before abolishing Obamacare, a Republican replacement health care law needs to be in place.

But the Freedom Caucus in the House is calling that replacement plan for what it is - Obamacare lite.

So the vote to repeal Obamacare is really just symbolic.  It is necessary, as some Republican legislators have said, to keep their promise.

I recall when I was about four years old, a dinner table dispute resulted in my threatening to throw my milk on my mother.  "Don't threaten me,"  my mother said.  To my four year old way of thinking, a threat was something you didn't carry out, like a bad promise. To avoid it being a mere threat, I had no choice but to follow through on what I had said I would do.  Even though I knew it would end badly for all involved.

I think that's sort of where we are with health care.  The Republicans have been telling us how evil it was for so long and how it had to be repealed, that now, with majorities in the House, Senate, and a Republican president, they feel they have to repeal it.  Even if they aren't really repealing it, they have to symbolically do something that they can at least say repeals it.  Except the Freedom Caucus.

The Freedom Caucus' narrative is hard to figure out.  Jim Jordan spelled out the mission statement in 2015:

 "The House Freedom Caucus gives a voice to countless Americans who feel that Washington does not represent them. We support open, accountable and limited government, the Constitution and the rule of law, and policies that promote the liberty, safety and prosperity of all Americans."

That's not exactly a narrative.  It's a set of goals.  But we don't know the underlying stories that make these goals critical for the Freedom Caucus.  This matters because, I would argue, that except for the 'limited government,' most of Bernie Sanders' supporters could wholeheartedly embrace these goals.

We aren't going to get past this conflict until people from warring narratives sit down together, preferably over a meal (or series of meals) and listen to each others' personal narratives.  Until they find out how much they (we) have in common as human beings, how much of their (our) narrative is myth, how much overlaps with their mortal enemies' narratives.   Until they see how their (our) macho conflict myths prevent any of those goals from happening.

Those people who took the trouble to vote in November were fairly evenly divided.  The president, despite his rhetoric, did not get a mandate.  He presides over a nation of people with different narratives and that has been focusing more and more on the differences between their narratives  than the similarities.  To the extent that we focus on the conflicts and on the symbols of our differences, there will be no peace for anyone.  Just temporary Pyrrhic victories.  People on both sides of this symbolic divide would do well to be curious about how their 'enemies' come to believe what they believe.

In the world that Rushdie (remember him, whose words started this post?) created, the chaos is caused by jinns, mischievous spirits from another world.  Best I can tell, our jinns, most of whose names are hidden by Citizens United, are people like the Koch brothers and Robert Mercer, and Putin, who  invest a small portion of their billions to disrupt honest debate with fake news, adding to the difficulty of sorting out what is and what is not true.



*Yes, I know truth is squishy.  Let's just use 'true' as a surrogate for 'as best we can tell that something is true, after looking at at all the evidence.'

Afternoon At Elliott Bay Book Company - Scary Old Sex, The Life You Can Save, And More

While in Seattle this last time, I got the pleasure of browsing the shelves at the Elliot Bay Book Company on Capitol Hill.  Here are some books to munch on.  I hope this reminds folks that there is more to do than follow Tweets about politics,

Alec Ross - Industries of the Future


You can watch Ross talk about this book at this Ted Talk presentation.  He talks about growing up in West Virginia and teaching in West Baltimore.  He thinks the kids he saw in those place are no less intelligent than kids anywhere.  Those kids didn't fail, the system did.

Premise of the book:  If the last 20 years were shaped by the rise of digitization and the internet, if that's what produced the jobs and wealth, what's next?
The book, he says, mentions a number, but in this talk he flags three.

1. Big data analytics - land was the raw material of the agricultural age, iron of the industrial age, and data is the raw material of the information age.  Background in data analytics will get you employment for the next 20 years or so.  
2. Cyber security - just an associate degree will get you a job starting at $60,000, with college degree, $90,000.
3. Genomics - The world's next trillion dollar industry will be created by our genetic code.  

Question is:  How inclusive will these industries be?  San Jose, for instance, has 4000 homeless people.
How to compete and succeed in tomorrow's world.

Three things we can do now for your kids:

1. Do not rely on the systems to save you.  Because the system fails kids.  Create your own system to save the kids.  
2. Make sure your kids learn languages - foreign languages and computer languages.  
3. Be a life long learner yourself.  

Loss of hope and loss of opportunity is fatal.

The video fills in a lot more background.  I've just given you the barest outline.

[If I do all of these in this much detail, I'll be up way past my bedtime.  I've already decided to do this in two parts.  Each one of these is worthy of a post of its own.  But the point is to just give you a quick look at these titles, like you were browsing in the book store.]

Ngugi Wa Thiong'o - In The House Of The Interpreter

Margaret Busby, reviewing this book in the Independent writes:

"From the first pages of In the House of the Interpreter, strong and memorable themes emerge: the power of education, the rootedness of kin, the need to transform the colonialist narrative. "How could a whole village, its people, history, everything, vanish, just like that?"

This memoir takes place in 1950s Kenya as the Mau Mau are fighting for independence from the British and Ngugi is going to a school.

"Alliance High School is a sanctuary. It is an elitist establishment – the first secondary school for Africans in the country – founded by a coalition of Protestant churches and initially shaped by American charitable funding that aimed at turning out 'civic-minded blacks who would work within the parameters of the existing racial state'".

Arlene Heyman - Scary Old Sex

From a New Yorker review:

"Consider a character like the retired doctor in the story “Nothing Human,” a grandmother three times over, who takes the opportunity of a cruise-ship vacation to berate her husband for his squeamishness: “We can’t try anal intercourse because you think I’m filled with shit to the brim. You have no sense of anatomy. I can take an enema! You can use a condom!” She knows she’s being less than fair. It’s the middle of the night, and he’s half asleep; she picked a fight over his not washing his hands as he groped his way back from the cabin bathroom, and now she’s turned to nagging to cover her deeper anxieties about the relationship. Was he in there to masturbate, when they haven’t had sex since the start of the cruise? When they got together a decade ago, after her first husband’s death, they couldn’t keep their hands off each other. She misses that, and she misses her first husband, too. But she’s too wise to indulge in nostalgia. When she dreams occasionally of her first husband, it’s in a detached, friendly way—'like a little visit.'”

This is a description of one of the short stories in this book, stories about older women and sex.  The author, Anne Heyman, is a psychoanalyst in her 70s.  To prove that so called sophisticated magazines like the New Yorker aren't any different from other media, the reviewer spends most of the review on literary gossip about Heyman's early affair with a much older famous author and how that affair is treated in different works of fiction.

Peter Singer - The Life You Can Save 

Singer is a prolific and well known philosopher.  You can actually read this book online here.   In the Preface, he writes about this book:

"I have been thinking and writing for more than thirty years about how we should respond to hunger and poverty.  I have presented this book's arguments to thousands of students in my university classes and in lectures around the world, and to countless others in newspapers, magazines, and television programs.  As a result, I've been forced to respond to a wide range of thoughtful challenges.  This book represents my effort to distill what I've learned about why we give, or don't give, and what we should do a out it."

Ken Liu - The Paper Menagerie


I pulled this book off the shelf because Liu is the translator for the Chinese science fiction book, Three Body Problem.

Amal El-Mothar writes about the book for NPR:

"Ken Liu's The Paper Menagerie and Other Stories is a book from which I staggered away, dazed, unable to speak. I have wrestled with how to review it, circled my metaphors like a wary cat, and finally abandoned the enterprise of trying to live up to its accomplishment. I will be honest, and blunt, because this is a book that has scoured me of language and insight and left itself rattling around inside the shell of me."

No wonder he was asked to translate The Three Body Problem.






Neil Gaiman - The View From The Cheap Seats




I know Gaiman from the graphic novel Sandman, a gift from my son.  This is a collection of non-fiction essays.  Kirkus Review writes:

"Gaiman (Trigger Warning: Short Fictions and Disturbances, 2015, etc.) is a fan. Of course, as a writer, he’s created unforgettable worlds and characters, but in this collection of essays, introductions, speeches, and other nonfiction works, it’s his fan side that comes through most strongly. The author writes about the thrill of discovering a piece of art that feels like it was made just for you; the way certain books or songs seem to slot into a place in your heart you didn’t know was there; the way a text can mean different things at different times in your life. If the idea of going on a long, rambling walk with Gaiman and asking him about his influences sounds appealing, this is the book for you."

Jason Heller offers a longer review at NPR.

Charles Johnson - The Way Of The Writer

From a short review in the NY Times:

"Johnson’s book, the record of a single year’s email correspondence with his friend E. Ethelbert Miller, is a piecemeal meditation on the daily routines and mental habits of a writer. Johnson describes his study’s curated clutter, his nocturnal working rhythms and the intense labor of his revisions, alongside a careful outline of a theory, reminiscent of both Aristotle and Henry James, of how plots emerge from a “ground situation.” There is a winning sanity here: Johnson wants his students to be “raconteurs always ready to tell an engaging tale,” not self-preoccupied."

As I read some of this book in the bookstore, it was one I knew I needed to get back to.


I've got another bunch of images of books from that afternoon which I'll try to get up before too long.

Remember That Muslim Kenyan? It Seems He Tapped Trump's Phone Too

Let's see.  The next step will be a call to have him removed from the US as an illegal alien.

The New York Times is reporting that FBI director Comey wants the Justice Department to deny Trump's claims:

"The F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, asked the Justice Department this weekend to publicly reject President Trump’s assertion that President Barack Obama ordered the tapping of Mr. Trump’s phones, senior American officials said on Sunday. Mr. Comey has argued that the highly charged claim is false and must be corrected, they said, but the department has not released any such statement."

I found the next sentence interesting for what it tells us about Comey (assuming, of course, this is accurate at all):

"Mr. Comey, who made the request on Saturday after Mr. Trump leveled his allegation on Twitter, has been working to get the Justice Department to knock down the claim because it falsely insinuates that the F.B.I. broke the law, the officials said." (emphasis added)

Back in October when he told the world about reopening the Clinton email investigation, he wrote to FBI  employees:

"Of course, we don’t ordinarily tell Congress about ongoing investigations, but here I feel an obligation to do so given that I testified repeatedly in recent months that our investigation was completed." (emphasis added)

Comey seems to have a strong need to protect his own reputation, which may skew his judgment.  

Back to the phone tapping allegations, the Washington Post fact-checker searches down references to FISA court requests and gives Trump four Pinocchios.

Sounds to me like the heats on over Russia and Trump's using his usual tactic of a diversionary attack to get people's attention off Trump.  I guess his mother didn't read him the story about the boy who cried wolf.  

Painting Beauty On A Wall

We went to the UCLA hazardous waste drop-off this morning and saw these guys actually painting this Beauty and the Beast billboard onto the side of the building.

If you enlarge the one below (click on it) you can barely see the lines on the wall where they are supposed to paint.

Glad to see that these painters haven't been replaced by a giant ink-jet printer.

What A Trump Presidency Would Look Like

I suspect a Trump presidency would be worse than many imagine, and not as bad as some imagine.  After Bush v Gore I proposed that there be a cable channel that followed what happened with the actual winner and a channel that created a world in which the other won.  I'd really like the Trump supporters to see what a Trump-led US would really look like.  But neither candidate will actually be able to do much until members of Congress start breaking bread with members across the aisle again.

But here's a bit of prognostication based on what we do know about Trump.

Preface:  I’ve done a several posts about Donald Trump and what makes him tick.  There’s a post about his father and grandfather. There’s the post about his mentor, Roy Cohn.  And we’ve all seen his behavior on the campaign trail.  Using that history, I think we can predict how he will behave as president.  We can’t predict specific actions, but I think we can predict the kinds of actions he’s likely to take.  What he actually does will depend on events, on other people, and on Trump’s ability to figure out how to make the US government apparatus work.

So, let’s start with his world view that underlies why he does what he does.  (A lot can be seen in his relationship with his father and with his brother who did not live up to his father’s ideal and thus was Donald’s first and closest example of a loser.  See the post on his father.)

Then we’ll look at the sorts of behaviors this world view leads to.

Finally, I’ll give some examples of those behaviors once Trump gains the White House.  


Trump’s World View:

• Power is everything.
• Life is a long poker session and while you're going to lose a few games, at the end of the night you want to go home a winner.   Poker is about bluffing.  Poker-face means being able to lie without people reading your thoughts.  Honesty is a handicap in poker.  You can call people all sorts of vile names during the game yet go home as friends.
• The worst thing you can be is a loser.  Losers are contemptible.  Not being a loser is one of Trump’s key motivations to have power.  To do or say whatever to have power.  And he trashes his opponents. And when he doesn’t have power, he at least has to look like he does.   (Would those missing tax returns show us he isn't as wealthy as he claims?)
• With power he can do whatever he likes with impunity.  Rules don’t matter if you have power.  Reward and punishment are the basic tools.  
• You do favors for people who can help you.  You try to stay nice as long as they have something you need - prestige, support for your projects, fulfillment of your lusts.  You can take what you want from the less powerful and they don’t have the power to do anything about it.  You can take the women you want.  You can stiff contractors because  taking you to court will cost them more than walking away. You can pay off the rule makers, such as politicians,  to bend the law to your will.  
• But if they don’t cooperate, you punish them.  
• You hire lawyers to fix what you’ve broken.  Lawyers, don’t simply defend you, they are also attack dogs to destroy those who cross you.

Trump’s behavior based on his need to be the most powerful.

The need to appear powerful means:

• Honesty is a handicap.  He says whatever makes him look good.  He denies all allegations of  wrong doing.   He lies about opponents.   The only truth is Trump power.  Facts that don't support him are lies.
• The center of attention is the best place to be.
• Promoting his private interests and fulfilling his needs are the basic goals.
• Putting the Trump name on everything he owns and even things he doesn’t own.
• Attack, counterattack, never apologize. (See post on Roy Cohn.)

Trump as President

Applying  his world view and the behaviors they lead to, we can anticipate the kinds of things he's likely to do as president.

Center of attention - Winning the presidency will assure this goal for as long as he holds the presidency - which could be briefly for any number of reasons, or, if he has his way, could be for his lifetime.

He’ll want to be seen with the world’s most powerful leaders.  Putin may well be the first one to be feted at the White House.  Watch for opulent displays of power and wealth with the rich and famous and powerful leaders of the world.

We can be sure his new Washington DC hotel will be the center of inaugural events as much if not more than the White House itself.   And we can assume that he will totally remodel the White House. Maybe a White Trump Tower?

The Trump name:  Look for the Trump name to appear on the White House and Air Force One.  If he can figure out a way to change  the name of the country to Trump’s United States of America, he will.  Maybe it will be on all passports.  On money.  On all signs for government buildings and national parks. How about Trump’s United States Marines?

Promoting his private interests, particularly his wealth:

Look for changes in the law that help Trump, starting with income taxes and deregulation.  He would find it useful to delete all the records of federal agencies that have records about him.  Again the IRS comes to mind and the court system.

He’ll want to make government properties available to his real estate empire.  Or make arrangements that benefit him for other businesspeople to take over government property.  He'll be privatizing agencies and land.  He might want to make National Parks into Trump resorts.  As with his campaign, he'll have the government contract with various Trump businesses.  When challenged on this, he'll say he's saving the country money and attack the challengers.  


Attack, Counterattack, Never Apologize

Nixon had an enemies list.  It will look tame compared to Trump's list.  It will have anyone who has blocked his path toward something he wanted,  anyone who mentioned his small hands or didn't do his bidding fast enough.   Top on the list are the media who can expose his lies and constantly make his life miserable.  He’s already promised to change the libel laws.  He’ll change whatever laws he can to stop the media from saying bad things about him.

Those who block his policies will suffer merciless attacks in all the ways we’ve seen on the campaign, plus whatever levers of government power he gets access to.  Republicans (Paul Ryan is toast) and Democrats who stand up to him will be subject to withering attacks, both visible and behind the scenes.  Comey will become the new J. Edgar Hoover, using the FBI as Trump’s private mafia.  If Comey doesn’t cooperate, there will be a new FBI chief quickly.

The first foreign leaders - including terrorist leaders - to belittle Trump, will see massive retaliation.  If they are white, western nations, there will be vitriol and threats of economic sanctions.  If they are part of the rest of the world, don’t be surprised to see Trump USA Air Force jets unleashed on them.


Surprises that shouldn’t be surprises

Given that Trump sees life as a game of negotiations, lots of what he's promised on the campaign is just bluffing.  Not everything will go as many expect.

The Clinton's - Since Trump’s world is a series of poker games, once he wins, the election will be over.  All the anti -Clinton talk was bluster to win the election.  All he's charged her with, he'd do himself.  It was just competitive trash talking.  If he can find the Clintons and their foundation and allies useful, he could be gracious to them and find ways to use them to increase his own power.

The Wall - I’m guessing there will be a symbolic move to start a wall along the Mexican border, but it might eventually evolve into a border-walk of casinos and hotels and a revised border patrol mission to help businesses get cheap labor and make deals with wealthy foreigners who can help the Trump mission.

Trump Supporters - They’ll continue to be fed Trump’s racist, sexist, nationalist, anti-semitic rhetoric, but other than that, their lives won’t be better.  He was nice to them while he needed them.  To the extent that he will need them for his next terms, he’ll feed them the lies they love.  He'll rant to them about those blocking his reforms.   But he has no real interest in them other than what they can do for him and he has no idea of how to actually improve their lives.  Trump’s tax plans will cripple   the economy and the hollowness of making America great again will become obvious.  Except for the very, very rich.  But even they will be vulnerable to a failing economy.


I could go on and on, but you get the idea.  These are the things that Trump would like to do if he could.  But I imagine he'll find the combined resistance of the Clinton supporters and the establishment Republicans he's displaced, of the bureaucracy which is intended to slow down despots, of the courts, and of women and  people of color will be overwhelming.   And don't forget the rest of the world.  Even his supporters will eventually figure out they've been had.

Preferably, Clinton will win and the Trump presidency can be the basis of cable television series.

"Conflicts of Interest and the Medical Value of Tree Frog Raise New Questions About Newstown Marshes"

That was the headline on the news article I submitted last night for my online class on Journalism Skills for Engaged Citizens from the University of Melbourne through Coursera. The lead paragraph went on:

"New revelations arose this week about the mayor’s personal financial interests in Futopia’s Newstown Marshes project and about the potential medical value of the endangered auburn tree frog.  More questions linger about the effectiveness of the flood control projects given the impacts of climate change on future flooding."

Over the several weeks of the course, new information emerges on the "Newstown" website which includes background on key players, press releases, interviews, and other bits of information on the events of the fictional community of Newstown, somewhere northwest of Melbourne, Australia.  Each week a little more is revealed.

Last week our assignment was to write a lead sentence for the story of the Newstown Marshes development.

This week we had to do a whole story.  I submitted mine just before the deadline - which is somewhat confusing for a class with people in Europe, North and South America, Asia, Africa, and Australia.

The key story revolves around a land development deal in environmentally delicate marshlands.

This week the instructors conducted video interviews;  one example of a poor interview and one of a good interview with each of the key players.  I do interviews now and then for the blog, and I know about preparing for them as an academic, but I haven't previously read stuff about how journalists do it.  One issue that resonated with me is that most journalists don't like confronting people about things they don't want to talk about.  That made it feel a little less daunting.   There was also an interesting lecture on interviewing people undergoing trauma - something that some journalists routinely, but isn't normally part of my blogger beat.

My blogging experience has helped me to review information quickly and see the whole story and then fill it in with facts and quotes.

After submitting our stories, we then have to grade four of our classmates' papers as well.  There's a template for grading that makes it fairly easy to mark levels on different aspects - like covering all the key facts in the story.

When I taught, I had  developed my own template for grading my students' papers which helped considerably to articulate to students what I was actually looking for and what I thought they did well or poorly.  It also forced me to give examples of why I gave a lower or higher grade.  Sometimes, in looking for those examples, I found my score on that factor was wrong, and I'd change it.

The templates for the course are similarly useful, but we're also limited in comments to:

The aspect of this article I most enjoyed was…

The most useful suggestion for improvement to this article I can make is…

The spelling and grammar errors I identified (if any) in this submission were…

I think limiting the areas for improvement is a good idea because taking criticism is difficult.
People can deal with one point, but lots might be overwhelming. And since everyone in this class is getting feedback from at least four classmates, that should suffice.  It also helps to make one's  point by identifying specific concrete examples and how to improve them.  This allows you to get straight to the issue without having to use judgmental terms.  

I've found that the papers I've had to grade were really quite good.  Generally they got the key ideas and were written in clear English.  Better than some graduate papers I've read here at UAA.  But I also suspect that a lot of people aren't actually turning in assignments because the number of  assignments listed is far short of the number of students who were originally signed up for the class.

A couple more things of interest in this assignment for me included the inverted pyramid idea and the Hemingway editor.

The inverted pyramid was offered as a template for writing news stories - with the most important

Image from Cyber College

points at the top, and then filling in the less important ones further down.  While that's generally a good way to write, specifically identifying it as an inverted pyramid was helpful.  And I think I've heard that before, but I haven't thought about it that way when I've been blogging stories.  And while I'll think about it now, I'm not sure that's the format I want to always use.  I like to give a lot more context and to speak directly from me to the reader about what I'm doing and why.  (Which is what the ethical principles I wrote about recently say to do.)



The Hemingway Editor is a tool to check the readability of your article.  You just paste it in and it gives you a score and marks your article up in different colors.

0 of 9 sentences are hard to read.

9 of 9 sentences are very hard to read.

2 phrases have simpler alternatives.

3 adverbs. Aim for 2 or fewer.

1 use of passive voice.Aim for 2 or fewer.

My sense is that this is a simple formula related to things like  number of words in a sentence and doesn't assess how well the words were put together.  One paper I had to grade got a horrendous Hemingway score, but was really quite readable.  With all the attribution we had to use in our stories, the sentences got a little longer and more comma'd up than the Hemingway editor likes.  But if it's done well it's fine.

But I think dropping work into the Hemingway editor is not a bad idea to remind me to look for easier ways to say something.  

I think there are a couple more weeks left of the class.  Overall, it's not too taxing.  The online interface is good.  We see the instructors in video, but we have no interaction with them at all.  We do have discussion boards, but there's relatively little extended discussion.  Teaching assistants monitor the discussions.  It's an alternative to getting information from a book, or maybe it's using the internet to augment what you can do with just print and it's not as linear as a book.  And I am able to take this class for free.  Maybe the paying students get more attention, but it doesn't appear so.  What they get is a certificate at the end.