Disruption and stability. And a third thing if I really want a hip title.

Remodelers just finished and left after three weeks of trundling about the house.  This is hardly worthy of complaint, even within the limited realm of first world problems, but there is a point to be made.

Years ago, when I lived in Lafayette, Indiana, there was a remodeling company which aired commercials on TV.  Their slogan was “When the workmen leave, your pride is restored.”  They meant, of course, that they will have restored your house to a condition you could be proud of, but they were oblivious to the alternate interpretation: that after weeks of the indignity of surly louts lumbering in and out of your life at their whim, you could once again claim control of your life.

It’s true, you feel it.  It affects not only the limited part of the day when they’re physically there, but how you eat, how you sleep, and everything else you do.  It’s a stressor, no doubt.

Now imagine being a refugee.

Politics, huh!

I contributed a fair amount of money this last election cycle, in a few cases to elect someone I thought would be good, in most cases to defeat someone I thought would be a disaster.  Oh, well, c’est la guerre, I suppose.  The vast majority of the people I thought would be a disaster I didn’t even know; it was the keep the Other Side from ascendancy.

Politically, I’m liberal, ish.  But I have some experience with countries that have gone to extremes both left and right, and I’ve come to believe the real culprit is ideology itself, irrespective of which particular flavor.  Being pragmatic doesn’t mean, however, that there can’t be certain guidelines, and, for me, that mostly ends up siding with the party slightly left of right of center, the Democrats.  They used to be lined up against the party slightly right of right of center, the Republicans; they still are, but the Republicans lately made a strategic decision to appear as insane as possible, probably on the inexcusably cynical notion that most Americans would find that attractive.  It worked, for awhile.  I’ll leave it to you to figure out why this coincided with the tenure of our first African-American president, whom the Republicans quite clearly and explicitly vowed to expel from the government.  This personal vendetta was their highest priority in the most complex global environment in recent history, and it was this complete lack of perspective that drove me to contributional excesses.

Well, now it seems the Dems have decided to flatter the dickens out of the Republicans, if imitation be the sincerest form thereof.

It is, of course, understandable, if indefensible, that when you contribute money to an enterprise, the most immediate response is for them to deluge you with requests for even more money.  If you respond to that positively, they crank it up a notch or two.  At a certain point, the requests become more like demands, and the demands contain threats of dire consequences to the nation, indeed, to humanity itself, of you not personally forking over yet more.  I understand all of this.  It is deplorable, but the nature of the beast.

Here’s what I don’t like, and what is turning me completely off:  More and more, the stated primary goal of some campaign or another is simply to embarrass the opposition.

“If we get this amount of money, or if this bill passes/doesn’t pass,  Boehner will be furious!”  Or the Tea Party will be livid.  Or some other such nonsense.

What?  Since when is that of any importance?  What happened to the consequences of the bill in question as an issue?  It’s as if they’re saying that once your financial contributions reach some critical point, they can drop the pretense of any substance, and go after the real target, the Other Guy.

This is precisely the kind of BS from the Other Guy that prompted my concerns in the first place.  Now it seems that even ideology is irrelevant, except to the extent it can be used to pry more money from a gullible electorate.