On this I agree completely. I believe that type of consensus and good will requires a lot of listening without interruption, compassion, avoiding quick reaction, and putting oneself in another person's shoes.

Those qualities are seen less and less often in public life and social media these days.

I excerpted this to save space, not to censor. I wonder if perhaps to a degree you conflate the philosophy behind the Articles of Confederation with that behind the US Constitution. I know there were many chasms among the proponents of a weaker or stronger central government among the men who wrote the Constitution.

Let's recall that ever since 1803's Marbury vs. Madison the Supreme Court has been expanding its role slowly but inexorably beyond the literal words of the Constitution. In the very same year, the Louisiana Purchase took Presidential power to a place many said was not envisioned in the Constitution. The House of Representatives tried to defeat the Louisiana Purchase but failed by a two-vote margin.

One could make a case that part of the American story through the Nullification Crisis of 1832, the Civil War, Reconstruction, increased Federal regulation under both Republican and Democratic Roosevelt Presidents and onward through the Civil Rights movement to today is a story of a nation growing more interconnected, less parochial, and more needing a centralizing Federal government to coordinate and regulate to counterbalance other large national and global forces in our lives.

This is the Constitution as adopted in 1789 nor even as followed in 1803, but we live in a world of increasingly rapid change. Can we, should we, roll back to the original vision? Would the alternative - what we have now - truly require a Constitutional Convention or a vast number of Amendments, all unlikely to happen?

This has been America's central ongoing political debate for many many years. In recent years, especially this year, we've seen it at its most vitriolic possibly since the mid-1800s.

Add to that the Internet, social media, blogs and opinion-oriented "news" sites, and the current style of cable and network news reporting all seem to be geared to amplify emotion and hard feelings while making it more difficult to hear and understand the life experience and views of others.

I recall in my childhood Federal regulations expanded under Presidents Nixon and Ford, not just under Democrats. Carter promised to streamline regulation and budgeting, did that with some, but added others. As a young man I saw Reagan's Administration limiting expression on social issues, such as women's health and family planning clinics discussing abortion. And on and on it continued...

No matter who runs the White House and Congress and the Court, I can't see the clock turning back on these kinds of actions by the Federal Government. It might be Ted Cruz's utopia, though perhaps he too may have exceptions.

Beyond that, I honestly don't know and I happily admit I can be wrong and change my mind. Now I must stop and catch up on the work I was unable to do yesterday.

~ Bob S.

About the work undone, here's note I had put on the Sex Listings Home Page: "As Editor & Manager of CFS I will be away for further medical reasons much of Tuesday, November 15, just as I was on November 11. Expect further delays publishing new Reviews, etc. on CFS."

I honestly can't say if I'll be here working or away doing something else from day to day or - more frequently - working at night. I appreciate everybody's patience.

Quote |