curious-est and curious-est

After my “curiouser and curiouser”

blog post of August 2nd,

commenting on our increasingly stranger and stranger

(mostly about Trump) presidential campaign, I reckoned

that between then and November 8th

I’d be moved to write a piece

called “curious-est and curious-est”

(for I love to make up words when I can’t find ones that best


my sense of what I perceive as essentially oddest

or fundamentally quirkiest

about our quintessential humanness).


Also in my August 18th post,

“my pivot,”

I declared my dismay

with folk on the airways,

whether candidates, political commentators,

or reporters,

who, standing on whatever side

of the political divide

were unwilling and unable

to channel

some (any!) degree of personal honesty,


indeed, integrity

to say of an opponent,

of another view a proponent,

You have a point.”


Thus, at that time,

I decided for a time

to walk away

from my day to day


of the news.


Well, some of the latest

words & deeds of the (unprincipled?)


which I consider fancifully (comically) escapist,

if not also colonially (sadly) expansionist,

have caught my attention,

leading me, at least once more –

long before

I thought I would

or could

to exercise my imagination…


To wit, Trump, in every recent speech

seeking to reach

African American voters –


by asking,


his view

of Democratic policies failed and few,

“What have you got to lose?” –

might, I think, choose

to make his pitch to an audience other

than largely white and rather to one with people of color.


Even more, Trump,


his cornerstone stance on immigration,


the immediate deportation

of “illegals”, 11+ million, each and every,

by force, if necessary,


with a speedy,


and politically

expedient nod to the Hispanic community,

is contemplating the “softening”

of his policy.


Still more, Trump, citing an audit

(for a man of his wealth, nothing odd about it)

won’t his tax returns release.

Hmmm, has he something to hide

about his business and financial ties?

Or is it

that he doesn’t

have as many billions as he contends

or that his liabilities trend

far higher than the value of his properties?


Now, not, never to overlook Clinton

whose problems with her family Foundation

continue to dominate the front page,

verily, the center stage

of her White House run;

involving foreign national contributions

that loom large in the pay-to-play

State Department controversies

and her stubbornly ongoing,

insufferably never-ending,

supernally everlasting

email difficulties.


Ah, “curious-est and curious-est,”


I believe this describes this campaign season best.

Or perhaps a word even better than best

is the one I used already

in my August 1st post, “unreliability & unreality”:



Still, I digress

with one last comment,

at least for this moment…



it hath oft been said,

“makes strange bedfellows,”

meaning, I suppose,

that common interests can bring together those

who, on the face of their individual views, would oppose

each other.


So, I wonder,

verily, imagine something even curious-est than this curious-est

presidential election campaign mess:

What if two diametrically disparate groups –

say, right-wing constitutional conservatives

and left-wing social progressives –

both tending to speak from the ground of reasoned conviction

and neither liking the choice between Trump and Clinton,


that is, formed a – however temporary – union,

indeed, a communion

to engage in sober conversation

(one void of dissembling disingenuity,

the sort of which I hear from the major political parties)

about national policy.


The point?

To bring to the center the far-flung positions

on one of our dominant continuums of opinion

as an act of radical inclusion,

therefore, counter to the division

so characteristic of this election season.


The purpose of the conversation?

To see,

if declared enemies,

as people of goodwill,

might find a way, still


and unknown,

toward a consensus

to bring us –

not some of us

or only friends of us

or just us,

but all of us

forward toward a future of equality

and opportunity.

6 thoughts on “curious-est and curious-est

  1. As I was reading this, Paul, I suddenly saw a picture of two groups of ragged, spent, nearly dead people being swamped by the swelling, roiling waves of an angrily pitching ocean, each group barely holding on to one of a pair of disintegrating, sinking, barely-there rafts, yet still raising their fists, gnashing their teeth, and yelling rank obscenities at each other. That image seems to me to capture what’s going on in this country as we approach this ridiculous election more than any other I’ve come up with. If I were a painter, I might try to paint it.

    Keep on pointing us toward a rational view of the totally irrational!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Karen, surely, though sadly, I consider your description both boldly depictive and brilliantly descriptive! Yes, both and all combatants going down without a fight though the fight is futile for no one is – or can be – saved!

      Still, I hope (not wishful thinking, I believe, but rather an abiding trust that we humans, at least some of us, will discern a better course than demonization of “the other” and decide to treat “the other” as another sister or brother) we will find a better way.

      Much love, always and in all ways


      • Likewise, Paul, to you and Pontheolla, much love and the wish that we could sit down often and reassure each other of the abiding trust that all your posts keep alive and help me hold onto.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Bless you, Karen. What I have found in my blog postings about this presidential electoral season is that something wildly fanciful, nonsensical is said or done by one or the other principals and I, feeling shocked or dismayed, am led to write, and then, in writing, am led to a grounded place of hope (for that is not where I started!). In one sense, I do not expect my hope to be rewarded, as if life or the world or the candidates owe me anything (for they do not). That said, I have found confidence in my faith in God’s abiding grace of care, for my hope is renewed each time I despair.

        Love always


  2. Thank you Paul!!!!! Been out all day and evening… had seen this pop up earlier and couldn’t wait to get home and read it!! It didn’t dissapoint!! I burst out laughing when I read Trump’s claim “what do you have to lose?” … I began making a darn list of what all we had to lose by voting for him. I loved Karen’s point too, that you keep us focused on the rational view for this craziness called a campaign. I look forward to more!!!! One question though… what will the next one be named???? Much love!

    Liked by 1 person

    • 😂 What’ll the next one be named! Good question!

      I was saving “curious-est and curious-eat” for later because I conjectured (and continue to conjecture) that this campaign will get worse. BUT I couldn’t resist writing after listening to Trump’s appeals to African American voters and all the rest and Clinton’s continued troubles.

      Truth to tell, my wild appeal at the end of this post – clearly a crazy idea, I think – that conservatives and progressives might coalesce around the idea of serious conversation is something I believe could help us all move (cut) through this terribly, tragically divisive era of American politics…

      In that hope, much love back to you!

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s