Day 1200 Four Men, Two Realities

Day 1200 Four Men, Two Realities

Saturday May 2, 2020 

183 Days until the election on November 3^rd

263 Days until the Inauguration on January 20, 2021

Einstein talked about two kinds of facts: scientific and historic. Scientific facts are those you can verify via experiment. Things that are universally true. The speed of light, the weight of an element, the separation of water into its two elements – these are all things that can be observed by measurement and or experiment. It’s what science is all about.

There’s another kind of fact, what I call “historical fact.” It’s a one time event. The recollection of which is open to interpretation. “John killed Fred,” is an example. It’s what murder mysteries are all about. The question raised is, “Did John kill Fred?” and then “Was it murder or an accident?” What do we know to be scientifically true? Fred is dead, if we have a body and it’s identified as Fred. The rest is speculation unless we can gather more scientific facts about Fred’s death. 

Let’s say it’s not a murder but a case of something else happening. Like “Mary slapped Betty.” Mary says she touched Betty’s cheek. Betty says she was bitch-slapped by Mary. Who’s right? Is it a question of degree? What if Mary says it never happened? These are questions that can never be absolutely answered because they are events that occurred in the past. Without evidence you have to go on reputation and hunches. “Does Mary have a reputation of slapping people?” etc.

This brings me to the other three men in today’s screed: Don, Joe, and Mitch.

Donald Trump has a problem with scientific reality. He seems to want to use the tricks that work to some degree in his attempt to rework historical reality. Trump has made a career of failing upwards, of lying and deceit. You can do this with history – to some degree. You can deny that things happened, or that they happened differently than others said they happened. But scientific reality is different. You can’t separate the two elements of water and get two other elements. Maybe, you can convince someone that it’s not hydrogen but helium, but that doesn’t make it so.

Joe Biden is being accused of sexual assault. Did it happen? Who knows? Maybe Joe; maybe the woman accusing him know. Maybe not. What do we know? Well, Joe is a hugger. I’ve seen lots of footage of him hugging people: men, women, children. Politicians kiss babies, it’s part of the schtick. Could some of that behavior be unwanted? Could some of that behavior make someone uncomfortable? You bet. 

But that’s in hindsight. Joe is an old line politician. You kiss babies. You hug people. That’s what you do. Now, in the era of MeToo, people are looking with a different eye. Joe has said as much. Did he intentionally touch people inappropriately? I’ve never seen any evidence of that, have you? Is there any footage or anecdotal accounts of him copping a feel, for example? Papa Bush in his older years, yes; Joe, no. 

Could what the woman claims be true. Sure. Is it? We’ll never know for certain. Is there any verifiable evidence? So far nothing has turned up. She said she filed a complaint. Last I heard that if there was a complaint it would be under the control of the Senate. That would be Mitch McConnell. I’m sure his staff is tearing the place apart looking for it. 

If nothing surfaces then you have to go on character. Does Joe have a reputation for this kind of behavior? Not that I’m aware of. In a different time, I could see a man in Joe’s position playfully slapping someone on the butt. Look what happened to Al Franken. Franken left the Senate because of a photo of him pretending to touch a woman’s breasts and because she claimed in practicing a skit he kissed her too much. She said years later when prompted by Roger Stone that Frankin forced his tongue down her throat. What? I never understood that. If true Frankin has a long tongue.

So with Joe we’ve got a case of historical fact and its recollection. The character of the man, his behavior, and the evidence suggest that the woman is recounting events that either never happened or happened much differently that she’s remembering.

As a man, I can say that I have been subject to fantasies by women. I’m no Brad Pitt, but In have had women tell their girlfriends something about me and her that never happened. It’s in the “Oh my god, did you hear?” kind of category. Nothing of a sexual assault kind of thing, but I have been subject to a young girl thinking we had something going on when I hardly knew the person. In all those cases, and there was more than one, we were young. In each case I have got to say I have no idea what the other person was thinking, but it was nothing that I did, said, or inferred. I found the events strange at the time, and I learned to steer clear,  as much as possible, of such people. I have run into men who have told me some of the most fantastical sexual exploits about someone else or some other couple in my circle of acquaintance. I can remember in one instance looking at the couple this fellow said he had had a menage a trois with the night before and thinking “No.” Just “no”. It did leave open the question of what in the world was that fellow thinking. I came to observe him throwing out more and more statements like this during my brief association with him. We were in a two week training class. He seemed to have a fantastical story about the night before almost every morning. I’ve never understood that kind of behavior. But I’ve learned to be circumspect and steer clear as much as possible.

In Joe Biden’s case, he can’t. He has to face it head on. I think he’s doing a good job. But let’s say it did happen, then what? I would say, he’d be better off saying, “Yeah, I did it and I’m sorry.” Or “Yeah, something like that happened but not the wya she’s recounting it.” Or it could be that something happened and he doesn’t remember it.

But what if it never happened? It seems to me that something may have happened, however the recollection keeps growing and getting more serious over time. This seems more like a Roger Stone type set up than anything else.

It recalls for me the story of the crystal skull. These glass skulls were produced in a shop in Brazil I believe. They are fakes. How can an expert tell? Well, the markings on them show that they were polished on a machine, not done by hand. But the real giveaway is that in a short period or time the workmanship got better. If they were handmade centuries ago, all would be about the same quality. The mark of a fake is that the maker gets better, therefore over time the objects become better made.

It seems to me that some incident may have happened. Maybe Joe squeezed her shoulders or hugged her or something. Maybe at the time she felt uncomfortable, maybe not. Maybe upon reflection she decided she didn’t like it, that it wasn’t proper. It seems her recounting has grown over time. It’s gotten bigger, more polished. 

Now we come to Mitch. He recalling the Senate. Most of the senators, if not all, are in the category of those who could be seriously negatively impacted by this virus. They are coming back to Washington DC at the height of the outbreak for Washington. He is doing this against the advise of the Senate’s own doctor, and other health professionals.
What is he thinking? Clearly, he doesn’t believe that they will be affected. What will it take for him to think otherwise? Will it take some of the Senators getting sick? Or will some have to die? Then what? Do we get an “Oh gee, I guess I was wrong.”? Doubtful.
What we are seeing in the behavior of both Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell is the attempt to use historical recollection and gaslighting in the face of scientific verifiable reality. If several senators get sick or if they die, that’s not something you can explain away. That’s a fact.

PS The fields of Bonampak