On the Brink
— Read on kenneturner.com/2020/01/21/on-the-brink/
Note: And, reflecting on a recent post of mine, please do not think that I am anti-intellectual. What are generalize to say “left intellectuals” there Is intended to indicate a certain type of intellectualism which is unable to view anything outside of its theoretical categories, because I miss reading of philosophy has led them to have faith in a certain type of understanding of the world where buy anything outside of it necessarily gets commandeered into their own self righteous categories .
For I consider myself a kind of intellectual. And then disrespect I submit that philosophy is actually intended to be an opening in to what is other, and not supposed to be a marker of how we should close ourselves into righteousness. 
$
And maybe I’ll use this particular linking post of mine to give my two cents on what I’ve been hearing over NPR of the senate impeachment trial.
And I may be biased; for sure, I have unseen biases.
But what I’m hearing is pretty much the people who are making arguments for why there should be certain witnesses allowed in this trial I really making a case for the constitution of the United States and for transparency. It appears to me that they are really attempting to draw upon our leaders reference for our way of life, for our constitution and for The United States.
I hear from the people making arguments of the contrary, or against hearing from the witnesses is that their opposition is trying to manipulate the system for political gain.
So on one side I feel that we have people who are saying like we believe in our system, let our system way the evidence that we have, and then I hear on the other side paranoia and arguments for why people are trying to manipulate the system.
It seems to me a kind of stale mate because whichever side you’re on you will see the other side as trying to manipulate the system for political gain.
Why I think our system is failing is because one yes politicians are trying to gain and trying to work with him politics, and so the accusation that either side is just trying to be political for their own gain, and yes, once one position is understood as being the more valid or Valeries position, then the other side necessarily appears as if it’s trying to tear something of our constitution down.
Personally I think that regardless of what the rules are, the spirit of the hearing should be upheld.
It appears to me that the people who fear for their career and have something to lose for themselves are arguing for a breach of rule. And these type of people in our government disgust me.
And then it also appears to me that the people that are arguing to let all the evidence and all the witnesses come forth, these people are the ones who truly represent the spirit of the United States Constitution.
But I think the latter might be a little idealistic, like myself. Somehow I like to believe that truth, honesty and Justice will win, but I fear that an ideology of self gain based in fear and paranoia ultimately always wins.
 it just plain sucks..