.
Feedback

Are We Asking the Right Questions, Wisconsin?

Are we asking the right questions? or, have we allowed others to foist their opinion in lieu of ours?

Are we asking the right questions?

Are we? As we throw insults and “insight”; data, contradicting data, and party-line rhetoric around, with, toward, and against one another, are we even asking the right questions? I don’t think so. I’ve been booed down, attacked, or whatever else for trying to explain why I advocate that Heidegger – for each and every one of us - is more relevant to our lives today than 99.+% believe possible. Not only are his ideas relevant and timely, but they are pathways along which we can move; they un-conceal a thought-process and present ideas by which we can live, ideas that can help us approach this election, the national one, the issues regarding sustainability, women’s rights, quite simply – how to live.

I confess that I am a believer in his approach to the creative power of “the word” – just imagine:  “Language is the house of Being. In this house man dwells.” A number of you can hear the echoes of St. John, in his Gnostic hymn: “The Word was made Flesh.” Heidegger’s renewal of St. John’s statement affirms that “Language creates world.” The phrase is not metaphoric; it is literal; and, as such, it IS. These gnomic statements quickly alert us, bring into focus the everyday Language in which we are immersed, in which we now abide. Yet we walk away from that-which-is-clear. How many of us consciously create the world we desire with the language of the day?

Have we not the same again with the insistent question: “Was Heisst Denken?” what does it mean to think? Let alone what does H mean, what are his 4 levels of looking at the question?  Or, is it any easier to wrestle with his straight-forward, allegational assertion:  “what is most thought-provoking in our thought-provoking time is that we are still not thinking.” Heidegger was able to see that language has been deadened metaphorically. As speakers we hear but no longer comprehend. Language no longer brings the thing into presence; today, language is code, simplified, nullified of its essence and insight. Instead it is a short-hand, especially in the world of politics and governing/power. We fail ourselves unless the code is deconstructed, unpacked, and revivified. Lewis Carol played with language to the amusement and edification of millions. We need a poet. For us language is being tending ineffectually and moving towards its own demise - at which point anything could mean everything and everything will mean anything; and, it all will mean nothing.

Why am I trying to bring Heidegger or a poet or Lewis Carol into a patch conversation? It isn’t because I think I’m better or that I’m any smarter than anyone here; I don’t have THE answer to any one question. But I do think we are on a collision course with Freedom – with a capital ‘F’; and, that is why I am trying to answer a question recently asked in the writing of this piece. Now the question came from another patch contributor, one whom I believe holds rational and balanced attitudes as evidenced by his thoughtful (usually) posts. He asked me why I find myself so invested in how we look at this election. It’s easy, Jay. I don’t think we see what remains concealed, what is hidden and not brought into the clearing. In other words, something strikes me as just not right, certainly not kosher, cricket, nor allowable if we just pay closer attention.

I admit: There certainly are those among this intended audience who don’t think so or don’t care seemingly because they believe that this doesn’t affect them  - they stand above the rest, above you and me. Now me, I’m “kinda” typical in Patch-ville, USA: I’m a lifelong Republican. Grew up in the Bay. Believe in God. Received a good education. Done ok at times, other times not. Been a sinner and a saint.  But this election really disturbs me at my core: something is rotten in Denmark! I think the spotlight has been shone on the wrong openings, the wrong clearings. In fact, I think we are looking at the wrong clearings altogether; and, I think we are not asking the right questions. Moreover, I think we’re selling ourselves short.

One thing that worried Heidegger, one of his pet peeves with the whole of western European man, the educated masses in particular, is the placid, unthinking existence of those of us just carried along by the flow: “…we are still not thinking.” Why are we not asking the deeper questions, the ones that do need to be asked and answered; and, if we are, are we unreservedly attending to the answers; are we then listening authentically, openly to what is in front of us; or, are we already on to the next fleeting thought? Moving away from that which needs to be thought, a movement natural to all humans.

Personally, I believe that we are not asking the right question(s). And, in not asking the right one, or set of questions, we are failing ourselves; and we are failing the generations to follow. I think the most “thought-provoking” elements of the current political situation are being shifted from view, sometimes hidden behind a veil that is embroidered using the vocabulary threads of the “words that work” weavers, who today embroider with the same thread sold by those hucksters, or ones identical to, those who brought ridicule to a certain hapless ruler, in the fairy tale “The Emperor’s New Clothes.” In this case the puppeteer brushing and dyeing the wool is a Republican and Tea Party adviser, the social researcher, Dr. Frank I. Luntz. He’s their “words-smith,” the guy distorting the facts and tricking us with clever phrases.

This election, the one here in Wisconsin as well as the National one, is not about “job creation.” It is about the nature of government. It is about ‘the Good’, about ‘Justice’ about ‘Truth’: the stuff that really matters: society, providing for one another. For me, this election - and, well, it really is the most important election of my life - it proposes to destroy our beloved democratic republic and the ideals upon which our country, our nation, was founded with a verbal misprision of ideas. Concept distortion is all around us and no one is seeing it. One party has become the party of only a few, only some of the people. That is not the American way. If we choose the side pretending to follow this Nation’s founding principles, we will like lemmings following a disembodied the Voice, fall off the cliff and drop into a world ruled by a plutocratic oligarchy, which will have won control of everyone’s life.

For me today, I am trying to detoxify myself from the bitter ads being shot across our bows. But I did hear one statement that I believe should apply more liberally to both sides. Yes, it was made by the President. Mr. Obama was quoted while speaking from the G-8 Summit: “My job is to take into account everyone not just some” – not just the elite few. Why would any one of us follow a path that excludes and only looks out for the few, for some? And why would, or are, we only looking out for the few, for some? By the way: are YOU one of “the some”? Are you comfortable with the underlying belief system that both parties have in fact? (Not what the patcher crowd pretends, by the way). Have you asked all the questions that need to be answered? What questions don’t you want answered for fear of what has been concealed? Sorry if this got a little too ethereal. I hope that it “touches ground” for more than a few careful readers. For me, though, I suppose my conclusion is simple: ask the next question and the one after that and… In other words, whether you like Heidegger’s phrase “Questioning is the piety of thought” or prefer the words of John Fowles’ Magus, “A Question is a form of life; every answer a form of death.” Let’s make sure we are asking the right questions before we sink the ship of state.

Bob McBride May 26, 2012 at 04:34 pm
It certainly speaks volumes about the amount serious of thought you've given the topic.
Nick Poulos May 26, 2012 at 08:00 pm
oh, wow! good come back. Actually when you ask a question that has no context, it is just a phishing expedition; and I won't bother. I've answered your questions, endured your insults. I realize that you and many people now think greed is the great virtue and that the concepts of Justice, The Good, Truth, Beauty, Unity, Goodness, Love and the 7 deadly sins no longer matter: since each and every one of you is his or her own god. I happen to believe that "only a god can save us." so it goes.
Bob McBride May 26, 2012 at 08:08 pm
There's plenty of context, Nick. You just don't want to be bothered with it.
The kind of society you desire has tremendous costs associated with it. Saying you'll give everything you can and then some isn't an answer. It's a philosophy. Philosophy doesn't put bread on the table. If you haven't even bothered to think through the costs involved in the Utopian society you desire and how those costs are going to effect the standard of living of those charged with supporting your society, you honestly can't be given credit for having given it serious thought. Deflecting and avoiding questions because you don't want to be bothered with them flies directly in the face of your oft repeated plea that we question, rather than accept. I guess that applies to everyone except you, eh Nick? You we have to accept on face value. To question you is out of the question, apparently
Nick Poulos May 26, 2012 at 09:39 pm
Bob, I'm busy with my kids and insulting me just proves it is not worth the time nor the emotional investment to try to open the mind of someone completely opposed to the issues at hand. And, again: it is not a contextualized question. In order for that to occur, the complete desired end-state has to be agreed upon. you just want a Governor who can be bought and sold and paid for by the wealthy, because, apparently, you believe greed and self-centeredness are the new American virtues; and, you wanna join the bandwagon.
the question you avoid answering yourself, except indirectly is this: do you want to have the United States remain and be strengthened as a democratic republic or have you sold yourself into a slavery unobserved and recognized, government by a plutocratic oligarchy. that is the question at hand. gotta run. kids to love.
Bob McBride May 26, 2012 at 09:58 pm
I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and suggest that the above is the result of you just not being a very good multi-tasker, Nick.
Abe Lincoln May 26, 2012 at 10:41 pm
I do agree that is about style of government. Big government with high spending not thinking about the debt our kids will have, big government imposing their rules on religious hospitals, big government thinking that it will create jobs through stimulus(that sure did not work) versus creating new businesses. I dont like that big government!!
The fundamental issue is that we have a President who has no experience at making tough strategic choices and leading groups successfully. It all flows down from there.....
Nick Poulos May 27, 2012 at 01:18 am
Bob, i just won't play your game by your rules. the question I put on the table is pellucid
- as in per + luceo/lucere = thoroughly clear. You keep wanting to take the conversation away from the critical point in the debate (although the personal integrity, morality, ethics, and honesty of Scot Walker all are at least suspect and must be questioned). I can multitask very well, thank you. Technology and living on patch.com are not health and life-giving: at least not when there can be no dialogue. And again, your question as posed cannot be answered by anyone. Even Lyle , who in all likelihood has worked out the algorithm to support an Utopia such as Plato's or Thomas Moore's, wouldn't jump in with an answer. nothing is defined. and I won't play the game the way you wanna. It's a waste of time. Answer the real question: Democracy, a democratic republic, or an Oligarchy driven by the Plutes,a government by, for, and belonging only to some, to the chosen Tea Party few, apparently i.e., you and your friends?
Nick Poulos May 27, 2012 at 01:23 am
i can respect your opinion, Abe, about size of government. this time you are wrong, however; in my opinion. The austerity measures you have been duped to embrace will NOT resurrect, and breathe new life into, our nation: it won't work. Read "End the Depression Now!" by Paul Krugman. We need a Roosevelt-like put the entire nation back to work type of investment environment, and we need many other changes, including taxing the rich instead of giving them - of all people - breaks they do neither deserve, do anything positive for others as a result, or provide decent jobs for others. Sadly, this is the crew self-centeredly raking in profits off the back of others while sending jobs off-shore, so that they can make more. There is a sin of super affluence, hyper-greed: it is not a virtue. Vote for Barret. Re-elect Obama: his vision and strategy are lazer-focused to bring us into the 21st ct, unlike the Tea Party which wants to return to the 1780's.
Bob McBride May 27, 2012 at 01:57 am
Nick, you don't need an algorithm to answer the question. Just some balls and some honesty. What percentage of your standard of living are you willing to forgo in order to pay for the Utopian lifestyle you envision for our country? It's a simple question. How much skin are you willing to put into the game?
I assume you understand that in order to support the kind of government you want in this country, it's going to cost the average citizen more than it does now, whether it be in terms of taxes, or cost of consumer goods, food, transportation, healthcare, etc - or all of them. You don't need an exact figure, other than a percentage you're willing to contribute to have the kind of system in place that you want. You can continue to avoid the question and look like an out of touch elitist who can't be bothered with trivial things like how we pay for your Utopia, or you can step up and say "Here's, specifically, the length to which I'm willing to go to have what I want". Your call, Nick. You're the one making it a "game" by refusing to address the very real considerations surrounding the kind of changes you want to this nation to make.
Jay Sykes May 27, 2012 at 03:22 am
I don't know where you see tax breaks handed out to the the rich, Nick. For those with income over $200,000 effective Jan 1,2013:
Tax rate on ordinary income will rise from 35% to 43.4%—(effectively 10% higher than under Clinton); Tax rate on capital gains will rise from 15% to 23.8%—a 60% increase(20% rate under Clinton). Tax rate on dividends will rise from 15% to 43.4%—an increase of almost 200%(39.6 rate under Clinton). The estate tax exemption will drop from $5 million to $1 million and the estate tax rate will rise from 35% to 55%—a 55% increase. No vote by Congress required;no Obama signature required; these rates are the law.
Nick Poulos May 27, 2012 at 01:11 pm
Jay, I remember the days when the tax rate was 93%. Things worked. And, in many ways, society was more civil; morals and ethics mattered. Allowing these breaks to go by the boards is only right and fitting at this point in time.
Anyway, the piece was really about the choice of government, and was written to answer your question as to why I feel so passionate about these elections. For me the question we face both in the push to elect Tom Barrett , as well as the one to keep Romney out of the White House, is form of government: today our true choice is between a democratic republic and a plutocratic oligarchy. Either we want an inclusive form of government or one designed by, with, and for, only the few.
J. B. Schmidt May 29, 2012 at 08:27 pm
@Nick
Was your tax rate 93% at that time? Better yet, do you write a check to the IRS for 93% of your income whether or not that is your actual tax bracket? Your life would be better off for it. That is the choice of the government. High tax, high government dependence or low tax, low government dependence.
Randy1949 May 29, 2012 at 09:16 pm
Few people were fortunate enough to make that marginal rate, J.B., but those who did didn't whine about it so much. And it didn't break the economy either.
I'm sure I don't have to tell you that a marginal tax rate of 93% doesn't mean paying 93% of your gross income.
Randy1949 May 29, 2012 at 09:18 pm
In retrospect, it might have been better of Bush to leave the Clinton rates alone. We might not have needed to raise taxes so dramatically to make up for years of insufficient revenue.
Bren May 29, 2012 at 10:51 pm
I remember a vigorous discussion awhile back about a particular word choice, "Everlasting" vs. "eternal." The NIV in certain places changed the word "everlasting" (KJV) to "eternal." I maintained that this usage, while superficially adequate, utterly failed to advance the passage(s) by robbing readers of the opportunity to experience their full emotional and syllabic resonances. The sheer poetic beauty of the word "everlasting," is immanent; "eternal" is perfunctory.
Perhaps this is why I am so offended by the meaningless catch phrases that define (not only) the Walker persona/"eternal" campaign strategy. "We're broke!" "It's working!" "'We're' Moving Wisconsin Forward!" "Backwards Barrett!" Such phrases, like the proverbial Trojan Horse, deliver lethal misinformation housed within innocuity. In the example of "everlasting"/"eternal," the perfunctory word choice arguably caused impact deflection in the reader. In the example of "It's working!" the "casing" of (false) well-being and security hides a bitter and expensive truth.
James R Hoffa May 29, 2012 at 11:11 pm
@Nick -
Why do you even bother asking us peon simpletons if we're asking the right questions or not when you've already provided us with the right answer in voting for Tom Barrett. A little disingenuous, aren't we? You remind me of Montalban's Khan from Star Trek - only without the Latin flair, charm, or charisma!
Randy1949 May 29, 2012 at 11:25 pm
Abe, do religious hospitals that serves the general public get to impose their rules on us? I think at some point, the government gets to step in and tell a Jehovah's Witness hospital that it must provide blood transfusions to accident victims or lose its license to serve the public.
Big government or small government -- we have to ask ourselves if the government will represent everyone rather than function as a business model, where only the productive are favored.
Tonto May 29, 2012 at 11:33 pm
Whats stopping all liberals from instructing their tax person to always take out and give the government as much tax as possible. Think of the collective good it would do. It would demonstrate they put their money where their mouth is :)
Jay Sykes May 29, 2012 at 11:48 pm
@Randy... I agree that the ordinary marginal rate(39%) and capital gains(20%) under Clinton did not need to need lowered. These changes likely caused the government revenue to be lower than it should/could have been. Unfortunately, even if we raised the marginal tax rate to 100% for all income categories for those with a total income of $200,000+(confiscating every last dollar they make), we still would not not cover the budget shortfall(deficit).
Randy1949 May 29, 2012 at 11:53 pm
No one asked for a 100% marginal tax rate on anyone making over $200K. Bu don't you think a return to the Clinton tax rates along with spending reductions would be a better idea that drastic spending cuts and further reduction in the top marginal rate? I'm not talking corporate taxes, mind you -- I'm talking individual. These people won't starve or be out in the streets.
Jay Sykes May 30, 2012 at 12:41 am
@Randy... My point is, that at a100% marginal rate for $200k earners,for personal income of any category(no change in corporate taxes), you still don't have enough money to cover a yearly Obama deficit; the Bush tax cuts are a drop or two in the bucket in the Obama budget. An in balance budget, with Clinton tax rates, requires 25-35% in spending cuts. Again, I agree Bush need not have changed(lowered) the Ordinary income or Capital gains rates, under Clinton. Experience tells us that we can get a nearly 50% in an ordinary income tax rate(federal/state/FICA),on about the top 10% ordinary income earners. The know achievable maximum rates are much lower for dividends and Capital gains, than for ordinary income.
Bob McBride May 30, 2012 at 01:45 am
I think he's missing the prosthetic beefcake man-boobs as well, but it's hard to tell exactly what's under the '80s retro business attire from the picture alone.
J. B. Schmidt May 30, 2012 at 11:10 am
@Randy
That is completely irrelevant. As I am sure you are aware, you and every other liberal in the US takes every advantage of the tax code and doesn't pay a single penny more then what your tax form says. Then turn around, as both you and Nick now have, telling the rest of us the need for higher taxes and the benefits to society. Until you and Nick freely give the IRS the percentages of your income you claim the rich can afford, proving that it has no impact; your words are meaningless. Lets face it, this is a 'do as I say and not as I do' moment.
Alfred May 30, 2012 at 12:32 pm
JB, Randy and his kind won't be happy until we are all broke and poor as him, living in filth and squalor....that is the liberals dream, equalized misery.
Alfred May 30, 2012 at 12:34 pm
Nick Poulos you idiot, no one paid 93% of their earnings in taxes, with the number of deductions(interest on car loans for example), the effective tax rates were much less.
It is too bad the students at UW M can't sue you for educational malpractice, never have I seen someone so stupid, but it explains your failed business ventures.
Randy1949 May 30, 2012 at 02:46 pm
@Alfred -- two things amuse me:
1) That someone who thinks deductions are the only thing that affects marginal versus effective tax rates can claim to be a successful businessman. I bet your accountant rolls his eyes and laughs behind your back. 2) That you think you have any clue about my living conditions. Your 'filth and squalor' remarks merely show your contempt for anyone you think is less worthy (makes less money) than you do.
Alfred May 30, 2012 at 02:52 pm
Randy, crawl back in your van down by the river, I never said that deductions were the only factor, I merely used it as an example for Professor Poulos, who is polluting kids minds, and yours. Now get back to your goobermint cheese sammich, and you are welcome for me carrying your water.
Randy1949 May 30, 2012 at 03:04 pm
Actually, you did say that very thing, Alfred. You must have slept through English class, if indeed you ever took one, because you can't write your way out of a wet paper sack. The word for the day is 'semantics'.
Nick is right. I remember a time when the marginal tax rate was outrageous according to you guys, and the economy was in much better shape. As for your insults about government cheese and vans by the river, you have no clue. I pay for my own food, I own my own property, and I probably carry some of your water.
J. B. Schmidt May 30, 2012 at 04:46 pm
@Randy
What is your proof the economy was better because of the tax rate vs. the economy appeared good because of where we came from yet was being held back by the high tax rate?
skinnyDUDE June 1, 2012 at 04:39 am
President. Mr. Obama was quoted while speaking from the G-8 Summit: “My job is to take into account everyone not just some. I think we all know this President has a lot of lip service and little reality. In West Virginia this fine President is looking out for everyone else so well he lost many counties to a Federal Prisoner from Texas in his Democratic primary.
i don't think the majority of the state have ever been so focused on the politics of this state and the course they want it to go . Let the voters decide theyre own conclusions to the questions that weigh on their own minds. That's Democracy!

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Shorewood Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Greg June 14, 2013 at 08:56 pm
Ankeny NewPatch rocks!
Vicki Bennett June 19, 2013 at 04:19 pm
This makes absolutely no sense to the normal reader. What the heck are your talking about??
Steve ® June 10, 2013 at 03:55 pm
So? What was used and what harm does it cause? Although ironic this may provide more good thanRead More harm. What is written on the application sign?
Cricket June 11, 2013 at 01:31 pm
The bluff and other areas need to be planted with things that will snuff out the weeds. They areRead More harmful to animals and possibly birds, of which there are many at atwater. Obviously not many animals but there are squirrels and rabbits and other native mammals. Not to mention the kids at the play area. Most adult humans can handle an occasional wiff of a pesticide but not children or animals. I have held several pesticide licenses in my day so I have had much course work on this. I am surprised the village has done this but I know restoration is about to begin - again - on the bluff and perhaps they are trying to rid the bluff of all the weeds. It is a shame that the 15+ kids they hire every year can't be up there weeding instead. I don't know what else they could be doing as the village has reduced the amount of annual flower beds that need to be maintained.
PaulRevere June 10, 2013 at 12:40 pm
The liberal minded Patch had it going their way for some time. Then, the contrary opinions became aRead More "voice to be heard". So, like all liberal media, just shut down the "free speech". Speech that educates the people is a NO-NO in the world of "public education". Have no fear, other avenues to educate the public is on the way.
CowDung June 10, 2013 at 12:53 pm
Given the amount of liberal propaganda that is posted around here, one does have to wonder if PatchRead More intended to make it more difficult to reply to comments (and set the record straight)...
Mike Stevens June 14, 2013 at 07:20 am
Wow, PaulRevere, AKA the hardest working person in America, who only takes 1 day per month off andRead More who believes all evil is related to public schooling, has time to not only comment on St. Louis area Patch sites, but on Milwaukee area sites as well? Paul, perhaps you should go back to school to check your grammar--other avenues to educate the public ARE on the way, not IS on the way. Oh, you must be too busy working 20 hours a day (but finding tons of time to comment on several Patch sites) to check grammar
Walker celebrates after defeating the liberal unionista blue fisters
Steve ® June 6, 2013 at 12:10 pm
Sure Keith. I am sure every time you use the term Tea Bagger it is not vulgar. The symbol for yourRead More failed recall movement was a Blue Fist. No one wants to be ruled by a fist and I don't see how that is vulgar when your own logo was a blue fist. Try again.
Keith Schmitz June 6, 2013 at 01:03 pm
Are you assuming we're stupid Steve? Don't. BTW -- you called yourselves Tea Baggers. We're onlyRead More using the term you selected. What a great PR roll-up for this group of Neanderthals. You're problem with that any fister reference is usually the speaker feels it is where his head should be.
Greg June 6, 2013 at 01:10 pm
OHHHHHHHHHHHHH, that is why their fists are blue, OUCH!
Bob McBride June 6, 2013 at 09:04 am
I think if you look at most of the sites still running the older version, you'll see the sameRead More messages of impending doom we got just before the change...
Bob McBride June 6, 2013 at 09:15 am
I got the name wrong, it was "Bellmore", not Belmont. It was part of rollout of what atRead More the time was being referred to as "Patch 2.0" in the press. It was rolled out to five towns in the Long Island, NY area in September of last year. I'm going to attempt to post a link to an article:: http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/mediawire/189296/aols-redesigned-patch-websites-make-a-play-for-neighborhood-groups/
CowDung June 6, 2013 at 09:30 am
"I think if you look at most of the sites still running the older version, you'll see the sameRead More messages of impending doom we got just before the change... " | I think that's true, Bob. I poked around at a number of Patch sites around the country and the 'Welcome to the New Patch' articles were full of the same complaints we are seeing here. | This Patch redesign seems to be the 'New Coke' of websites...
Greg June 4, 2013 at 03:38 pm
Starting at ONLY $70,000.00 Time to cash in your aluminum cans.