News & Articles

Letter to to Phil Anderson

In response to your piece in the November 14^th edition of the Reader titled “We are screwed”. Yup, we are, although ‘fucked’ may be a more appropriate descriptive. What I didn’t like about that piece was the ending. Yes, it’s an unhappy ending, this election and all, but I hope you’ve had a little time to reconsider your thoughts on giving up. It’s ok to give up on changing the world, that’s too big a goal, but don’t stop trying. In my opinion, you’re the best writer in the Reader, and your words offer inspiration to all your readers to never give up.  Thank you.
Kurt Nelson
Cornucopia, Wisconsin

Was it really about the money?

No doubt President-elect Trump won the election, but the question is why? Trump had angered Latinos, Haitian Immigrants, women, young people and environmentally concerned people. At the same time, his minions said ugly, mendacious, slanderous and horrible things about Kamala at Madison Square Garden – yet Trump still won? Democrats keep agonizing over what they did wrong, like ignoring critical data about the election. But when all is said and done, Kamala’s loss was not about jobs or the economy, both of which were recovering well. While Trump’s judges on the Supreme Court overturned precedents, and placed thousands of women at severe risk before doctors were allowed to operate on them to save the mother’s life, or, that of her child.

Yet wages were rising faster than inflation, under Biden interest rates fell to 3%, crime rates had decreased and oil wells were more numerous, Yet Trumpers kept on chanting “Biden is ruining the country” or “Biden is ruining the economy” ad-infinitum, while voters knew little about what was happening. So lots of the GOP’s erroneous talking points were accepted, despite the many voters who didn’t like Trump, had fears about jobs and increasing high gasoline and food prices (all of which were decreasing) but led them to vote for Trump despite any indisputable facts. So, yes, it was about the economy, stupid, but only because Trump’s campaign used lies and disinformation so effectively.

Consider that – Trump had racked up 6 bankruptcies and ruined the economy by attempting to minimize COVID-19’s role, while our supply chains were already damaged by his incompetence. Voters preferred him on crime, even though Kamala was a distinguished prosecutor, and he was a career criminal with histories of rapes, fraud and tax evasion. Trump was convicted of 34 felonies, and most of all, he encouraged a violent insurrection – later laying the blame on Nancy Pelosi, for not summoning the police, the National Guard or the military – even though no member of Congress is authorized to do that? Voters also believed Trump could handle the border crisis better, even though right before the election, he killed a comprehensive, bipartisan border bill, that would have helped decrease the influx of illegal immigrants considerably. Why? It was a crucial campaign issue that might have prevented Trump from using the border for politics.  But when Vance admitted his lies about immigrants eating cats and dogs, he only doubled down and claimed he had to lie – to call attention to a situation that included Kamala’s attempts to make it easier for refugees to establish legal residency, even though immigrants had already been thoroughly demonized.

So we all should learn to research these issues before voting, and not be impressed by any “stinking facts.” Thus we have seniors wanting to gut Social Security and Medicare, women voting against their own reproductive decisions, and motivating Hispanics to elect Trump, while also voting to protect their loved ones from being harassed, threatened, jailed or deported. Most voters knew Trump was a wannabe dictator, but voted for him as a strongman. Who alone could deliver jobs and restore purchasing power? So excuse me if I say, “It was the propaganda stupid.” 

Republicans have PhDs in propaganda, while Dems have hardly finished the first grade. And thus the right’s efforts to lie, cheat and frighten, handed Trump a victory while using his his golden toilet seat to close the deal.
Peter W. Johnson
Superior, Wisconsin

Whoops!

Psychopaths tend to display a range of characteristics, including narcissism, lack of empathy, black-and-white thinking and occasionally sadistic and paranoid traits. Have you ever wondered whether someone you know (friend or family member) or someone you know of (a public figure) is a psychopath? Read on. 

When psychologists assess potential psychopaths, they often use the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R), which lists 20 traits and behaviors. For each item, the individual is scored 0 if the item does not apply, 1 if it applies partially, and 2 if it is a good match.  The 20 items included in the PCL-R:

Glibness/superficial charm
Grandiose sense of self-worth
Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom
Pathological lying
Conning/manipulative
Lack of remorse or guilt
Shallow affect
Callous/lack of empathy
Parasitic lifestyle
Poor behavioral controls
Promiscuous sexual behavior
Early behavior problems
Lack of realistic, long-term goals
Impulsivity
Irresponsibility
Failure to accept responsibility for own actions
Many short-term marital relationships
Juvenile delinquency
Revocation of conditional release
Criminal versatility
Out of a potential score of 40 for the 20 items, 30 is the cutoff for psychopathy in the U.S. (25 in the UK).  Of course, the checklist is not diagnostic, in and of itself, and may be misused or overinterpreted. In fact, the professionals who developed the PCL-R caution users, stating that when properly applied the PCL-R requires up to 3 hours of interviews by experienced clinicians, and the use of source materials such as documentation of prior behaviors.

Bearing these cautionary notes in mind, the PCL-R may nevertheless be useful in identifying individuals who are likely to be trustworthy, as low checklist scores are associated with high degrees of empathy and affiliation. Conversely, we may need to be wary of individuals who have high PCL-R scores, and to be particularly careful in giving them power and control over others.
Charles Gessert
Duluth, Minnesota