AIPAC involvement in Democratic Primaries: Implications of Jamal Bowman's Loss

Jamal Bowman (D-NY), an outspoken critic of Biden's genocide in Gaza, was successfully ousted by AIPAC and other pro-Israel groups yesterday. AIPAC spent an unprecedented $15 mil on the Democratic Primary in NY's District 16. Including other pro-Israel groups,  BBC reported that, "Overall, $24.8m was spent by various groups in the race, making it the most expensive House of Representatives primary in history." There are many lessons and takeaways. Here I emphasize 3 of them by excerpting 2 articles on the significance of the election.

 1) The manner in which the Israel-Palestine issue has brought the internecine conflicts between progressive Democrats and moderates to the fore and stoked internal party divisions by supporting members of the Congressional Black Caucus and Progressive Caucus** who adopt pro-Israel policies, while  isolating those who refuse to support the now-bi-partisan policy of unconditional support for Israel-- esp. "the Squad"  

 2) The stealthy nature of the policy support, as many of the  ads and rhetoric against Bowman did not even mention Israel, much less any particular policy preference related to it. 

3) The important fact that much of the money that went into defeating Bowman (and Cori Bush is next on the hit list) came from the GOP.  

The following articles (and links contained therein) discuss these 3 and other serious implications of yesterday's primary in District 16, NY, which  looks like a template of things to come. The first piece is from The Intercept and the second from Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

**Fr. AP article linked above: "AIPAC has defended its track record, telling The Associated Press last month that 'it is entirely consistent with progressive values to stand with the Jewish state' and that the group has a history of supporting members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus."

Fr. Intercept (6/26/24):

Progressives on AIPAC’s Defeat of Bowman: “Now We Know How Much It Costs to Buy an Election” 

Rep. Jamaal Bowman’s Tuesday upset defeat by Westchester County Executive George Latimer generated many perspectives on what exactly precipitated his downfall.

The New York Times published the headline “Bowman Falls in House Primary, Overtaken by Flood of Pro-Israel Money” — before swapping it out for “Bowman Falls to Latimer in a Loss for Progressive Democrats.” Other coverage emphasized that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s spending wasn’t the only factor in the race and that Bowman’s flaws made him particularly vulnerable, as did changed district lines that made his reelection even tougher. 

Progressive strategists, however, had a much more clear takeaway from the results. 

“You don’t drop $15 million on an election if your positions are popular,” said Eva Borgwardt⁩, national spokesperson for the Jewish advocacy group IfNotNow, which endorsed Bowman. “This was an act of desperation from a pro-war lobby that is at odds with the majority of Americans, including American Jews.”

Borgwardt⁩ was referring to nearly $15 million spent on the race by AIPAC, the Israel lobby’s flagship in the U.S. Millions more poured in from AIPAC-aligned groups and donors, bringing the outside spending total to around $25 million.

Bowman’s supporters emphasized that AIPAC attacked him not only because of his criticism of human rights abuses in Israel, but also because he has supported progressive policies that are popular among the party’s base.

“Congressman Bowman’s progressive platform — which includes defending Palestinian rights and halting weapons to the Israeli military — is popular among Democratic voters,” said Beth Miller, political director for Jewish Voice for Peace Action, which endorsed Bowman. “AIPAC had to spend a truly unprecedented amount of money in order to buy NY-16.” 

“It is noteworthy that many of AIPAC’s ads did not even mention Israel,” she said. “AIPAC understands that they are losing on the issues, because voters and constituents do not want to fund a genocide.”  

The amount of spending on the race should be alarming to everyone who cares about democracy, said Sophie Ellman-Golan, director of strategic communications at Jews for Racial and Economic Justice.

“Now we know how much it costs to buy an election,” she said. “That price tag was nearly $25 million.”

AIPAC invested historic amounts of money in the race because it saw that unconditional support for Israel was unpopular among Democratic voters, Ellman-Golan said. “They would not have spent this much money if they were not scared,” she said. “You don’t spend $25 million — an unheard of amount in a primary — if you’re feeling confident in your candidate.”....

 

“Republican billionaires just bought a safe Democratic seat through a Democratic primary,” said WFP National Director Maurice Mitchell. “That’s something that should alarm everyone in the coalition, not just progressives.”

Justice Democrats’ communications director, Usamah Andrabi, said the takeaway from Tuesday’s race is that Democrats are allowing big money — and Republican donors — to shape elections. (Full article here) 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fr. Quincey Institute of Responsible Statecraft (6/26/24):

Bowman crushed by GOP-fueled AIPAC cash:

The pro-Israel lobby is effectively laundering campaign funds for Republican megadonors into Democratic primaries

Last night’s defeat of Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) by Westchester County Executive George Latimer in the Democratic primary was an undeniable victory by moderate Democrats who sought to retake Bowman’s seat — particularly in light of his alignment with the progressive wing of the party, and his sharp criticism of Biden’s material support for Israel’s war in Gaza.

But Latimer’s win also provided the most dramatic proof of concept for a controversial new strategy by AIPAC, the country’s biggest pro-Israel lobby: using its super-PAC, United Democracy Project, to funnel millions of dollars in Republican donor funds into a Democratic primary.

Put another way, AIPAC effectively acted to launder campaign funds for Republican megadonors into the Democratic primary, where the spending was generally identified in media as “pro-Israel,” not “Republican.”

By election day, Latimer-aligned groups had outspent Bowman’s backers by a margin of over seven-to-one, with UDP leading the spending, injecting approximately $15 million to support Latimer.

Most of UDP’s money didn’t come from Bowman’s district and much of it didn’t even come from within the Democratic Party.

WhatsApp founder and billionaire Jan Koum donated $5 million to the UDP in this cycle, making him the UDP’s single biggest funder, and the only instance in which Koum’s money appears to have funded a super PAC active in Democratic primaries. Other than the UDP, Koum is a down-the-line Republican donor over the course of his political giving.

In the less than three years he’s been an active political donor, Kloum has spent over $18 million, including $10 million to a super PAC supporting Nikki Haley’s presidential primary campaign and $1.35 million to the Republican Jewish Coalition.

Other seven-figure UDP donors include Home Depot founder Bernard Marcus and hedge fund manager Paul Singer, two of the Republican Party’s biggest donors.

While Koum, Singer, and Marcus are all supporters of hawkishly pro-Israel U.S. policies — reflected in their philanthropy as well as political contributions — UDP’s identity as a pro-Israel, AIPAC aligned, group has largely overshadowed the fact that Republican donors spent heavily to defeat Bowman.

While Bowman’s loss was clearly a setback for critics of AIPAC and for those questioning how providing largely unconditional military aid to Israel benefits Americans, it opens new uncertainties about the future of AIPAC’s influence within the Democratic Party.

If AIPAC must continue to rely so heavily on Republican megadonors to boost pro-Israel candidates, particularly within the Democratic Party’s own primaries, it may be symptomatic of a weakening pro-Israel consensus on the left side of the U.S. political spectrum requiring increasingly desperate attempts by AIPAC to assert influence, even going so far as to funnel Republican donor money into Democratic races.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I highly recommend the following documentary on civilian deaths in Gaza, and US complicity. It was released this week. It's about 80 minutes, so you may want to bookmark it to watch later if you are interested. It is called "The Night Won't End: Biden's War on Gaza," and is an Al Jazeera Fault Lines Documentary. Because it has been labeled "age- restricted" by youtube, you can only view it there by clicking on the link on the screen below.

 

The danger of protecting demagoguery

The New York judge in DJT's falsified business documents case changed the gag order. DJT is now allowed to publicly savage, slander, lie about and incite violence against witnesses and jurors in his case. If a juror or witness winds up dead, that blood will be on the hands of the judge, DJT and the murderer(s). The AP writes:

A Manhattan judge on Tuesday modified Donald Trump’s gag order, freeing the former president to comment publicly about witnesses and jurors in the hush money criminal trial that led to his felony conviction, but keeping others connected to the former president’s case off limits until he is sentenced July 11.

Judge Juan M. Merchan’s decision — just days before Trump’s debate Thursday with President Joe Biden — clears the presumptive Republican nominee to again go on the attack against his former lawyer Michael Cohen, porn actor Stormy Daniels and other witnesses. Trump was convicted in New York on May 30 of falsifying records to cover up a potential sex scandal, making him the first ex-president convicted of a crime.

In a five-page ruling Tuesday, Merchan wrote that the gag order was meant to “protect the integrity of the judicial proceedings” and that protections for witnesses and jurors no longer applied now that the trial has ended and the jury has been discharged.

Merchan says that abandoning jurors and witnesses to the enraged savagery of DJT and MAGA freaks is OK now that the trial is over. Yes, the proceedings involving jurors and witnesses is over. But the authoritarian attacks on the integrity of the rule of law and the judicial system continue unabated. That should have been sufficient to keep the gag order in place, but it was not. 

IMHO, Merchan made a colossal mistake. It might get some innocent people killed.

Also my opinion, this exemplifies the most important weakness of democracies that revere free speech. Demagogues like DJT can and have killed various degrees and forms of democracy in their ruthless quest for wealth and power. Sometimes they kill innocent people along the way. Respect for free speech led Merchan to unleash the poisonous vitriol that drives DJT. Innocents in that trial must now bear the serious burden of Merchan's decision. Dark free speech is being used by authoritarian demagogues to destroy American democracy and the rule of law. There's not a damned thing we can do about it. 

Killing inconvenient free speech

If DJT and his thug supporters ever establish the American authoritarianism they seek, one of the first casualties will be inconvenient but honest free speech. The main target to be silenced is criticism of the thug Republican autocrats in power and their corruption. The Chinese government did that and it still does. To varying extents, so do autocrats in Russia (Putin), Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Iran, Vietnam, Ethiopia, Hungary, the Taliban in Afghanistan and now, to some extent, the Republican Party in the House of Representatives. Autocrats hate criticism and ban it when they can. Democracies cannot do that. Democracies that protect free speech are defenseless from powerful internal and external dark free speech assaults.

Political news bits

A gun violence epiphany! (finally): 

U.S. surgeon general declares firearm violence a public health crisis

Vivek H. Murthy called on the nation to address gun violence with the vigor used to reduce deaths and injuries from tobacco and motor vehicle crashes.

The surgeon general’s advisory marked the first time the nation’s leading voice on public health — the same office that in the 1960s highlighted the lethal consequences of cigarette smoking — had issued an urgent pronouncement on deaths related to firearms. The 39-page advisory underscores the significant physical and mental toll of gun violence on communities nationwide.

Despite growing public sentiment favoring stronger firearm laws, gun groups, including the National Rifle Association, have long opposed stricter gun measures. In 2021, the NRA launched a $2 million campaign opposing President Biden’s efforts to bolster gun-control measures. The surgeon general’s advisory also met with criticism from the NRA.

Perplexity on gun violence: Gun violence costs the U.S. approximately $557 billion annually, which is about 2.6% of the gross domestic product. Gun violence results in approximately 40,000 deaths and twice as many injuries each year in the U.S.. In 2020, there were 45,222 gun-related deaths, making it the leading cause of death for children and teens under 19.

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

AARR (America's authoritarian radical right) blames Biden for massive federal debt. That is another massive AARR lie.

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Although it is sill too early to put much weight on it, recent polling suggests a sentiment shift among young voters: Young voters backing Biden over Trump by 23-point margin: Poll -- The CBS News/YouGov poll found 61 percent of likely voters younger than 30 surveyed support Biden while 38 percent support Trump. These voters are more likely to say abortion, climate change, and race and diversity issues would impact their vote than those older than 30.

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

From the Brass Knuckles Capitalism Files: 

Last year, representatives of New Mexico’s oil industry met behind closed doors with the very groups with which they typically clash — state regulators and environmentalists — in search of an answer to the more than 70,000 wells sitting unplugged across the state. Many leak oil, brine and toxic or explosive gasses, and more than 1,700 have already been left to the public to clean up.

Oil companies had agreed to work with regulators to find a solution to the state’s more than 70,000 unplugged wells. After months of negotiations, the industry turned against the bill it helped write because it was unhappy with the bill’s final language. The influential New Mexico Oil and Gas Association told its supporters that HB 133 was “a radical and dangerous approach designed to strangle the oil and gas industry” and asked them to send their elected representatives a form letter opposing it.

Good 'ole oil lobbyists - a fine bunch scumbags,

mostly Trump supporters

Q: Why do lobbyists for major economic sectors and major corporations have so much power that they can and do routinely subvert and betray the public interest?

A: Because America has pay-to-play political systems and the lobbyists are backed by enough cash to buy politicians to subvert and betray the public interest.

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Republican tyranny and vengeance plans for 2025: 

Conservative-backed group is creating a list of federal workers 

it suspects could resist Trump plans 

Tom Jones and his American Accountability Foundation are digging into the backgrounds, social media posts and commentary of key high-ranking government employees, starting with the Department of Homeland Security. They’re relying in part on tips from his network of conservative contacts, including workers. In a move that alarms some, they’re preparing to publish the findings online. 

With a $100,000 grant from the Heritage Foundation, the goal is to post 100 names of government workers to a website this summer to show a potential new administration who might be standing in the way of a second-term Trump agenda — and ripe for scrutiny, reclassifications, reassignments or firings.

The concept of compiling and publicizing a list of government employees shows the lengths Trump’s allies are willing to go to ensure nothing or no one will block his plans in a potential second term. Jones’ Project Sovereignty 2025 comes as Heritage’s Project 2025 lays the groundwork, with policies, proposals and personnel ready for a possible new White House.

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

DJT is looking for a way to weasel out of the debate in two days?: A non-paywalled source reports that DJT is getting worried about the debate. He keeps harping on wanting a drug test for Biden. If nothing else, he could downplay a good performance by Biden as due to performance-enhancing drugs. Or, just maybe he will use a lack of a drug test as a non-excuse excuse to avoid the debate.

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Israeli politics poisons American politics: AIPAC Unleashes a Record $14.5 Million Bid to Defeat a Critic of Israel -- The deluge in outside spending, which also includes another $1 million from another pro-Israel group, threatens to sink Representative Jamaal Bowman.

Although AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) is a powerful foreign agent, it still has not been classified as the agent of a foreign power. Our congress is corrupt, incompetent and subverted by special interest money. AIPAC is currently registered with Congress as a lobbying group, not as an agent of a hostile foreign power. In my opinion, Israel is a hostile foreign power.

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Crackpot & poison tales from MAGAlandia: San Antonio U.S. Rep. Chip Roy says he wants to 'ethnic cleanse' white progressives -- In a tweet defending Donald Trump's plan to deport 20 million migrants, Roy said he wants to deport "white progressive Democrats - with a special bonus for rich ones with an Ivy League degree."

The decline of rural America

I have posted several times about the decline of the rural economy (here and here). The phenomenon is not unique to the US. For example, in the 1970s, the Soviet Union government decided to abandon support for rural areas as they go from sustainable economic independence to dependence. Abandoned Russian villages are reverting to primordial forests with packs of wolves freely roaming the land. In Russia, that was a decision driven by economic reality coupled with an incompetent, deeply corrupt, authoritarian government. 

By contrast, the US has pumped vast amounts of money into rural areas that can no longer self-sustain. This topic is important because it is political and has been highly weaponized by America's authoritarian radical right wealth and power political-social movement. This will probably be a significant issue, maybe major, in the 2024 election.

A recent NYT article discusses this again: 

‘Too many old people’: A rural Pa. town reckons with population loss

There is a deepening sense of fear as population loss accelerates in rural America. The decline of small-town life is expected to be a looming topic in the presidential election.

May 31, 2024, Main Street in Sheffield, Pa.

Deaths outpace births

SHEFFIELD, Pa. — Lee Goldthwaite might have the most stable job in this remote corner of northwestern Pennsylvania.

The caretaker of Sheffield Cemetery is busier than ever directing crews clearing trees to make space for more graves as deaths dramatically outpace births here and in other vast stretches of rural America. Each time he buries a newly deceased resident he wonders how the town that once drew scores of young families will survive.

“We already lost our bank,” Goldthwaite said as he took a break from trimming the grass around headstones. “We lost our liquor store, and we may be about to lose our high school.”

Across rural Pennsylvania, there is a deepening sense of fear about the future as population loss accelerates. The sharp decline has put the state at the forefront of a national discussion on the viability of the small towns that have long been a pillar of American culture.

America’s rural population began contracting about a decade ago, according to statistics drawn from the U.S. Census Bureau.

A whopping 81 percent of rural counties had more deaths than births between 2019 and 2023, according to an analysis by a University of New Hampshire demographer. Experts who study the phenomena say the shrinking baby boomer population and younger residents having smaller families and moving elsewhere for jobs are fueling the trend. 

The Center for Rural Pennsylvania, an agency overseen by the state legislature, estimates that Pennsylvania will lose another 6 percent of its rural population by 2050. Some counties, including Warren County, where Sheffield is located, will experience double-digit population declines.

State lawmakers and other leaders now consider the population loss a crisis and are drawing up plans to try to reverse the trend. They say neither Pennsylvania nor the nation can afford to lose small towns and the institutions that power them. Not only are they a touchstone of American life, but they are also key to driving certain sectors of the economy, like agriculture.

Sheffield’s only ambulance was taken out of service about two years ago, around the same time the community’s only day care closed due to low enrollment. Starting this school year, teens are being bused to a distant high school because there are not enough teachers to staff the local one.

Residents are peeved that the local bank branch and liquor store have closed. The organizers of the town’s beloved Johnny Appleseed Festival recently announced they don’t have enough volunteers or money to continue. And many of Sheffield’s churches no longer have full-time priests or pastors, deepening residents’ sense of malaise.

“I wish I had an idea to say, ‘If you do this,’ this place can be turned around,” said Jack Cashmere, 86, a lifelong Sheffield resident. “But I guess you just have too many old people like myself.”

In 1980, Sheffield Area Middle-Senior High School had about 600 students. The current enrollment is just 224. The broader Warren County School District — encompassing most of the county — also saw its school enrollment decline by more than half since 1980.

As the presidential election approaches, many residents in this deeply Republican town say they view Trump as having a better vision for salvaging rural America, even though Biden has steered billions of dollars to initiatives that support rural America.

But at the Lee House, one of two remaining bars in Sheffield Township, many patrons were not optimistic that either Trump or Biden has the answers needed to save the community. The bar, which dates back 150 years and advertises on its front door that smoking is still allowed indoors, now routinely closes at 9 p.m. due to “fewer and fewer people,” said Carla Allen, the bar’s owner.

“I don’t want either of them for president,” said Barb Strike, 54, as she puffed on a Parliament cigarette and sipped a Bud Light. “They don’t care about us because no one in this town is rich enough for them to care.”

Kenneth M. Johnson, the demographer at the University of New Hampshire, said the deck remains stacked against most rural communities, except for those within proximity to larger metropolitan regions or those with industries that rely heavily on immigrant labor. “Barring some outside occurrence, it’s very unusual for counties to recover,” Johnson said.

The political implications of this are easy to see. America's authoritarian demagogues will demagogue this issue and blame Biden and liberals for something that they themselves have been and still are powerless to stop. In modern American radical right politics, inconvenient reality does not exist. Fake reality based on irrational attacks and demagoguery is what authoritarianism must have to thrive on and grow powerful.

People like Barb Strike will not hear or believe much or anything about the failing efforts of America's political center and left to protect rural people and their communities. What they will hear plenty of is authoritarian Faux News, the authoritarian radical GOP and the dictator DJT lying, slandering and demagoguing the issue. Despite their great noise and smoke, cynical authoritarian demagogues will not provide plausible solutions to the problem of rural decline.

Spotting deepfakes; Research about the origin of life on Earth

An interactive NYT article (not paywalled) tests your ability to spot deepfakes generated by AI. I got 7/10 right. This is a useful little exercise because it gives tips about what to look for. It is getting harder to spot deepfakes, but it helps to know what to look for.

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

Experts are still intensely interested in how life arose on Earth. If it happened here, it could be a model for the origin of life anywhere in the universe where life might be. A NYT article (not paywalled) discusses some current thinking about this interesting little question:

The rail cars stopped [in the abandoned gold mine shaft]. We stepped out and walked a short distance to a large plastic spigot protruding from the rock. A pearly stream of water trickled from the wall near the faucet’s base, forming rivulets and pools. Wafting from the water was hydrogen sulfide — the source of the chamber’s odor. Kneeling, I realized that the water was teeming with a stringy white material similar to the skin of a poached egg. Caitlin Casar, a geobiologist, explained that the white fibers were microbes in the genus Thiothrix, which join together in long filaments and store sulfur in their cells, giving them a ghostly hue. Here we were, deep within Earth’s crust — a place where, without human intervention, there would be no light and little oxygen — yet life was literally gush­ing from rock. This particular ecological hot spot had earned the nick­name Thiothrix Falls.

Scientists like [Magdalena Osburn, a professor at Northwestern University and a prominent member of the relatively new field known as geomicrobiology] have shown that, contrary to long-held assumptions, Earth’s interior is not barren. In fact, a majority of the planet’s microbes, perhaps more than 90 percent, may live deep un­derground. These intraterrestrial microbes tend to be quite different from their counterparts on the surface. They are ancient and slow, re­producing infrequently and possibly living for millions of years. They often acquire energy in unusual ways, breathing rock instead of oxy­gen. And they seem capable of weathering geological cataclysms that would annihilate most creatures. Like the many tiny organisms in the ocean and atmosphere, the unique microbes within Earth’s crust do not simply inhabit their surroundings; they transform them. Subsurface microbes carve vast caverns, concentrate minerals and precious metals and regulate the global cycling of carbon and nutrients. Microbes may even have helped construct the continents, literally laying the ground­work for all other terrestrial life.

Like so much about Earth’s earliest history, exactly where and when life first emerged is not definitively known. At some point not long after our planet’s genesis, in some warm, wet pocket with the right chemistry and an adequate flow of free energy — a hot spring, an impact crater, a hydrothermal vent on the ocean floor — bits of Earth rearranged themselves into the first self-replicating entities, which eventually evolved into cells. Evidence from the fossil record and chemical analysis of the oldest rocks ever discovered indicate that mi­crobial life existed at least 3.5 billion years ago and possibly as far back as 4.2 billion years ago.

Among all living creatures, the peculiar microbes that dwell deep within the planet’s crust today may most closely resemble some of the earliest single-celled organisms that ever existed. Collectively, these subsurface microbes make up an estimated 10 to 20 percent of the biomass — that is, all the living matter — on Earth. Yet until the mid-20th century, most scientists did not think subterranean life of any kind was plausible below a few meters.

Although these early studies were tantalizing, many scientists remained skeptical because of the possibility that surface microbes had contaminated the samples. In subsequent decades, however, researchers continued to find microbes in rock and water obtained from mines and drill sites all over the world. By the 1980s, attitudes had started to shift. Studies of aquifers clearly indicated that bacteria populated ground­water, even thousands of feet below the surface. And scientists developed more rigorous methods for preventing the accidental introduction of surface mi­crobes, such as disinfecting drill bits and tracking the movement of fluids through the crust to make sure surface water was not mingling with their samples.  

“This research really is a form of exploration,” [University of Toronto geologist Barbara Sherwood Lollar] says. “Some of the findings are causing us to rewrite the textbooks about how this planet works. They are changing our understanding of Earth’s habitability. We don’t know where life originated. We don’t know if life arose on the surface and went down or whether life emerged below and went up. There’s a tendency to think about Dar­win’s warm little pond, but, as my colleague T. C. Onstott likes to say, it could just as easily have been some warm little fracture.”

The life came from 

below hypothesis

Some of the scientists described here work about 4,850 feet underground in an abandoned gold mine in South Dakota. It stinks of brimstone (hydrogen sulfide gas) and is hot and humid (90ᵒ, 100% humidity) down there, even though it is below freezing winter temperature on the surface.

Microbes growing in hot water

near the Old Faithful geyser in Wyoming 

One argument I am aware of against life evolving first on the seafloor at thermal vents is that even thought there is plenty of free energy at those vents, the ocean is simply too big. Biomolecules would be too diluted in an ocean for abiogenesis, i.e., creation of life from non-life. Instead, warm, moist underground pockets or geothermal surface pools with plenty of free energy are plausibly small enough to allow pre-biotic molecules to concentrate in the water there sufficiently to spark non-life into life.

How faithful are you?

Got something on the heavy side to start off the week.  I’ve brought this subject up before, but it has been a while.  We may have some new people here who might want to chime in.  Or, maybe you have changed your mind on your previous answer.

Do you ever think about the Pledge of Allegiance?  We have one here in the states, and maybe your country has one too, if you live in another country.  Here is what ours looks like:

Using Mirriam-Webster's definitions, let’s also look up two of the Pledge’s key words:

Pledge : a binding promise or agreement to do or forbear.

Allegiance : loyalty and obedience owed to one's country or government. 

 

Now for the questions:

1. When was the last time you were asked to (or expected to) pledge your allegiance to a flag?  (E.g., at jury duty, at a Rotary or other club meetings, at a church or other community organization, etc.)
2. What does the Pledge of Allegiance mean to you?  Just what it literally says?
3. What do you think the Pledge of Allegiance means to others (newly minted citizens, the military, the “man on the street,” other)?
4. Is pledging allegiance more of a sentiment than a real obligation?  (I.e., it’s the thought that counts?)
5. As one who pledges such allegiance, what do you think is expected of you?  (E.g., to follow all civil laws, to never criticize your country, to die for your country, other?)
6. If/When you recite the Pledge of Allegiance, and if you are an atheist (we have plenty here), do you skip over saying the “under God” part?
7. Is the Pledge out of date? Is our "one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all" a lie?
8. Are we becoming more perfect or less perfect as a union?  Explain your answer in detail?

(by PrimalSoup)