Show Notes: 2018-01 1/7/18

BeforeShow Notes: None

AfterShow Notes

Episode Title: "Who IS Citizen?"
Special Guest(s): None

The inaugural show for 2018 went, overall, very well. There were a few issues:

1. I (Bud) have a cold that nearly required today's show to be cancelled (cnx). Given the audio quality of the show, a positive argument could be made that it should have been. Sniffling, coughing, etc. was very distracting and pronounced. Given how the show turned out, I believe my call was correct. My apologies to all who did or will hear the episode for the sorry state of my health on this day.

2. The original show went for 2:02:02 (auspicious, anyone?) and edited to 1:45:58. The edited show was loaded to the original episode page, the syndication pages and the blog. The original was filed away in the show archives, along with the edited version beside it.

3. I owe one caller an apology, and a promise. Michael, from Minnesota was the star of today's show who gave a most credible performance for the side of the "true conservative Republican" (sic). I gave him pretty much all the time I could to present his case(s) given today's topic. We learned he was a naturalized citizen who had quite a bit to say from his point of view. We agreed on many things, and the only substantive disagreement I had was that he has the unfortunate habit of doing a "Rush Limbaugh" on himself, me, and the listeners of the show.

Whether from habitual practice as a well-prepared speaker (he definitely was so), or from an inate fear of speaking (highly doubtful, given his performance on today's episode), he would first make a most credible argument, and then kill it with poison tags for effect.

Example:

"Argument" 1. Expansion of argument 1: The Leftist Media. Communists of the left. Liberal Hollywood/Media elites. Etc.

I call this the "Limbaugh" effect for a reason. Over several decades of listening to the shows of himself, I have made three primary observations. Two of them (not the third) I felt applied to many of Michael's arguments today:

1. He presented completely legitimate arguments from a decidedly personally held view (conservative). They were, for the most part, factually accurate, well considered, and additive to the discourse. The listener could clearly understand and appreciate his positions. It is at this point that, in my personal view, Limbaugh (and others) should simply shut up, invoking the authenticity of silence. They either do not, or cannot.

2. He then sets out to completely destroy his own legitimacy, in (in Limbaugh's case, definitely) an attempt to make himself (not the position) superior to any inquisitor via attack by ad hominem. "You leftists." Etc. STOP IT!!

It does not add to, but merely destroys any legitimacy your argument may have had to your opponent. This logical fallacy of Rhetoric is known as "The last defense of a failed argument." In Michael's case, in at least four instances I can recall, it was also the FIRST failure of the argument made. With Rush et al, it is to be expected as day is to follow night.

3. Finally, Rush works tirelessly to convince his listeners that Rush is correct because Rush said it. Period. To argue his position is to make yourself to be seen a fool. Quite the opposite usually occurs, and costs Limbaugh a good number of listeners on a regular basis who wish to be informed, not preached to.

Michael could well have gone traipsing through this particular garden; he did not. I believe that could well be due to a particular tactic I used in hopes of keeping his feet from going there:

I blatantly interrupted him on several occasions, either stopping his words or overtalking them.

This is a (usually) unnecessary and completely disrespectful tactic in the course of civil discourse. I use it very sparingly. I do not want to interrupt a person while they are losing their own argument, much less when said position is in argument against ones self. It was a rude thing to do.

I hope Micheal will accept my sincerest apologies, and my promise that, should he deign to participate in dialogue with me in the future, I will not submit him or my listeners to such disrespectful behavior. At least now, Michael, you know why I did so. Next and future times are entirely upon your shoulders. I stand absolved my sin. :)

Today's show focused on what will be for at least the next episode, a topical overview journey through the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. It remains today, as it has since it's initial, revised, and final ratifications as one of, if not THE most litigated Amendment, or of any part of our Constitution. The constitutional definition of "citizen" is found within it's first section. Michael's question given our producer (Progressive Patty) was:

"Does today's show have to do with illegal immigration?"

At that moment, the show became about illegal immigration, so the answer to his inquiry was "Yes!"
It does seem a bit of a stretch to go from the definition of citizen to illegal immigration in 2018, but that was precisely the point of today's show. From the definition of who citizen is, to who is or may be excluded from citizenship, and why, to how one loses citizenship are all contained within the body of this Amendment and the case law springing from it. That does include, up to and including the current lifesupprt struggles to impose an immigration ban in America today.

I do not concede that Michael's inquiry was coincidental. As it turned out, we learned that Michael is not a "birthright" citizen; he is a "naturalized" citizen. I strongly urge you to listen to this episode for just that reason. His perspective is not a unique one in our country, but could well be very unique to our listeners. I appreciate his willingness to share his views with us; they definitely added to the discourse of this, and future episodes of Progressive Politics: Tennessee Style (PPTS).

The answer to this episode's challenge question: "Who was the first President of the United States of America?"

Photo courtesy of the Free Social Encyclopedia

The first President of the United States of America was George Washington.



The answer, sadly, lies in the formulation of the question.  (Hey, we respect the intelligence and research skills of our staff and listeners!)

We were not known as The United States of America until after March (or November, depending on your point of view), 1789. Prior to that date, we were, under at least three different variations, known as the USCA: the United States in Congress Assembled. From the origination of the Articles of Confederation through the Second Continental Congress, a total of five USCA's officially existed, and one of which never met. Each of them had their own President. Of the five men either selected or elected, two never served, one served for less than one year, and one for two years.

                                                     John Hanson, Courtesy of Brittanica.com

The most famous of these was John Hanson, of Maryland. It is not accurate to say that John Hanson was, in fact, the first President of the United States; he was not. It is significantly more than a mere technical argument to say otherwise: it is purely historical revision of the facts. That's why it matters, both historically and legally, as the John Hanson Memorial Society has discovered to their dismay since the 1970's.

Up until that point, the Society was leading the charge in the preservation and honoring of all things John Hanson for his contributions to our founding--and, I submit, rightly so. However, when the inaccuracy was clearly identified and labelled as such in the early 1970's as a result of significant historical research into the matter, the purpose of the Society changed.

Since that time, the Society has worked to correct the error. The myth is still highly transported across every venue including the internet. It went a long time underground, barely beneath the surface of American history (and squarely through the American Civil War, for anyone interested). Today, the Society gives honor to an American Patriot, which Hanson surely was, while endeavoring to place his historical relevance in it's proper position.

Thanks to Michael, Patty, the entire team, and you our listeners for a good show. I appreciate it, very much.

The Tennessee Progressive

PS:

Take a moment, and attend to the PPTS first comment of 2018:

Yngve Soegnen

"I'm not a US Citizen and don't live in the USA, but am a European and live in Latin America close to the USA. The world and its people are all the same basically. but what goes on in the USA is important for the world because of its might, so we from outside need to chime in about what's happening there some times.
Tennessee isn't the place with the most progress in the world to put it very politely, but deep darkness is needed for a very small light to be seen far away. Many pinpoints of lights become a blazing sun. We can only do what we can do. Then big things happen..."

Looking At History To Determine Our Future

PPTS has completed the groundwork of a 24 week series entitled "The War On The Poor!". In retrospect, the arguments raged, even for the series title. Many on the team, and from listeners wanted the series to be called "The War FOR The Poor!". I chose the final series title because the alternate option seemed to be more appropriate for those who would come to disagree with the information presented in the series.

I did, however choose for each "battlefield" to include the word "for" because these eight investigations, each lasting (at least) three episodes deal with areas of our nation's life which seem to be at risk. Women, equality, healthcare, education, Justice, etc. ...these battlefields all seem to stand in the gap, at risk.

That's because they are. Forces well above the abilities of the average citizen, those who make up the 99 percent of us all are engaged in a very uncivil war to capture each battlefield, not for the greater purposes of increasing the lives and living in America of all her citizens, but rather for the taking by oligarchs, corporatists, plutocrats and theocrats for nothing more than the joy of refusing their bounty to any but themselves.

This is, in the end democracy itself at risk. Mine is not the unthinking cry of the vain, or the timid. These are not thought experiments or some laboratory exercises.  Nor are these inscrutable mysteries innoculated from our thought and reason. They are the vanities of man.

Has this ever happened before, anywhere?

Of course it has. It has happened since time immemorial. Power has been defined, denied, refused and won by man over man, but to what end? In some cases, for the betterment of all. In other cases, for the vanity of a few.

The cost of democracy has, is now, and will always be nothing less than diligence. From even before our experiment began, we were warned of dangers to democracy by those very same founders (and many others) of our nation. History has, so far, proven their warning prescient and timely. Strangely enough, even ancient warnings are holding sway today across our land. There has been, and remains to this day, only one power strong enough to overcome those who would simply take from democracy and The United States of America all they can hold before tossing aside the vestigial remains of what once was.

That is the voice of citizen.

During this month of October, 2014, we are investigating realities from our past, from even before the founding of this nation to the present day to see, and realize just exactly what it is we have accomplished, what it is we stand to lose, and what we can/should do about it right where we live "...within 12 miles of where you live."

Thomas Jefferson believed that his generation must win the independence, and the next must win the equality for all. From the enlightenment of the world, we faced the eventual necessity of addressing our inhumanity to our fellow man directly, painfully, and finally. That task remains, to this day, unfinished. Equality is a noble ambition, yet one fraught with difficulty and danger. Thus, our investigation quickly moves from the "know about" to the "know how" of democracy in our time.

Victorian and Edwardian England have much historical significance to our goal as a true liberal democracy. If every person, every citizen matters then we must understand how nations have failed at proving it. Yet, the history of that time in England reverberates with the words and feelings--and actions which we must deal with now. Those same words and feelings from way back then are being heard in our own country today, but not only where we live, but across the planet. As repugnant as we may find them, we do not create service for ourselves or our fellow citizen by ignoring them. We've been trying that for a very long time, indeed. It is also important to note that many great and wonderful things came through those desolate days, as well.

By investigating the thoughts and mores of those times in England (primarily due to their overwhelming presence at the time, and the clear historical record which remains of them), we can get a more observable view of ourselves today. We might even understand that the "War ON the Poor!" of those days has not changed very much, much to our national shame.

I promised a video that would be very difficult to watch, yet one I believe we must see in order to begin a genuine conversation and discourse about what WE should do about it, right now. Here is that video. It's approximately 90 minutes long. It is very difficult to watch, and is not safe at work or for children. Nevertheless, I urge you to view it. Take notes. Make observations. Look around our national landscape today, and see if you can hear, or see anything akin to what this documentary presents to you.

From the days of the workhouse/poorhouse, we visited the history of America and the world from 1900 to 1950. Two World Wars, planetary economic collapse, and the folly of greed and avarice. Why one assassin's two bullets killed tens of millions of humans in the search for power and economic superiority was investigated. I stopped the series here, because I believe we have enough reason just from these few episodes to take seriously the series which came before it.

From this point until November 9th, 2014 (following the national general elections), we will be looking for your response to both series, and your election stories. Do you agree, or disagree with the views expressed by PPTS during these past two years? Why, or why not? How did your voting go? Was it important enough for you to do what was required to experience the sanctity of the ballot box, to actually "exercise the franchise"? Were you citizen?

As this is written, early voting is under way. What will be the story we share on November 9th, and beyond? What have we, as citizen, determined to be the foundations of our nation's future history? Will democracy be preserved, or have we chosen to allow our land to slide over the abyss, not into war, but into Hell itself? How shall we answer the world, and the ages?

That will be decided one of two ways. Either citizen will show up, and show off, or citizen will not. There is no other possible conclusion to this most important election in 2014. We hope we have explained why we hold this conviction. We hope you have become sufficiently informed, and we now look to you to share with us YOUR reasoning, and YOUR actions.

For PPTS,

The Tennessee Progressive

One Series Ends; Another Series Begins

It has taken PPTS 28 weeks to present a 24 week series we call "The War On The Poor". During this series, we looked at eight principle battlefields upon which this war is currently being waged. Having now looked, in three week "chunks" at each of the eight battlefields, we have completed the research, but have not yet determined any useful conclusions, talking points, or action plans for this war. We will, but we want you, the progressive soldier to have some time to consider how this information can be of the best use to you in your cause, where you live. That got the team talking.

Without "finalizing" and putting to bed this issue, one we obviously believe to be singularly important to us, because we do absolutely believe it to be of the greatest importance to you, our conversations have turned to what many would believe to be the next important question:

How do we use this information to determine our future actions? How can we implement a determined strategy in time to have the impact we wish on the November, 2014 elections? Who should lead us? How should we communicate with those leaders effectively, in a timely manner so as to create the opposition against our adversaries? What would victory look like?

It was that last question that had a bunch of people looking squarely into my face, as if I should, somehow not only be able, but willing to forcefully and passionately discourse on THE answer. Hundreds of pairs of eyes, mind you, from across the nation are looking at me like I'm somehow the Shell Answer Man.

I gave that job up some long time ago now. Having had the position for more than four decades, I felt that I had done my part; that it was well time for someone else to pick up the ball and run with it, as it were. The trouble was that I did have a few answers. I thought they were good ones. I want(ed) to put them out for consideration. (Note the sliding transition?) I think they should be considered; moreover I believe they are such correct answers that they should be immediately employed across our nation, right now.

Where are we going, as a nation? That's a huge question. While not necessarily the answer many would accept in 2014, I do happen to be a bit of an historian by nature and education. If you want to truly understand the nature of a thing, look at the people involved in, subject to, or affected by that thing. In 24 recorded 2-hour events, PPTS has done just that. But, there lies at the heart of our nation today a much more, I would contend, fundamental question than our show's mantra of "What are YOU going to do about it?"

In our latest show, we begin to search for not merely a functional or useful answer to this question, but one which compels us, as citizen, to act. That is, after all, the Progressive way. (It's available for you here, on the right sidebar under our "Current" shows listing.

In the coming weeks we will look both to history AND current affairs to come to some fundamental conclusions about the answer to this question. Through our staff research and (hopefully) yours, we should have some civil discourse  about the answer to this new question. In fairness, this question is not new. It has been answered on several occasions before, in (and before) our history as a nation.  We'll use that historicity to look at some potential answers to this notion of where we are, or at least where we should, as citizen, be leading our nation into the decades and centuries ahead.

My contention is that we do have the opportunity to reevaluate the conditions which led to previous answers, so we can understand how to make current decisions that will make those answers better for us as citizen. This is neither easy, or easily dismissive work. Yet, in my view it is the most immediate and necessary work citizen can do for our nation, and for our democratic republic. We do stand to lose both. The fact that you do not fully appreciate the truth of that statement so alarms me that I am putting the resources available to me into full use. This isn't play time, and the work required is absolutely NOT for the feint of heart, or for the "sunshine patriot".

I hope you will join us for these next weeks as we hear from history as we ask, and answer this most compelling question of our time.

For PPTS,

The Tennessee Progressive