Monday, October 29, 2012

a moral triviality that is not valid and that in no way threatens marriage

I endorse this opinion and wish that I had written something like it.

It's time for all of us, not just our young people, to tell the older bigots that we as a people have had it with all this unnecessary stress on a moral triviality that is not valid and that in no way threatens marriage as a foundational relationship between caring human beings.

Why I hope Conservative Christians Will Fight Gay Marriage Tooth and Nail Till their Teeth and Nails Fall Out

A true Kindergarten Konservative would know about this sort of thing.

They know girly men when they see them, right?
Right! A true Kindergarten Konservative would know about this sort of thing.

Obviously ... based on the stated "castrastatic" definitions, the most macho, smack-em-in-the-face tough-talkin-konservative would be none other than ... are you ready for this?
...Ann Coulter.

Conservative pollster: Nate Silver is wrong because he is ‘thin and effeminate’

Friday, October 26, 2012

Why this Mormon campaigns against the Mormon candidate

When Barack Obama, who wasn't my first choice to win the Democratic nomination in 2008, was nominated, I found myself surprised once I overcame a severe disappointment, and found myself listening to him with rapt attention and a hopeful heart. I found myself wanting him to be for me -  in every way - a repudiation of President Bush, Bush policies and Bush's political party.

But after his election, I had to redefine my heretofore idealistic perception of politcal reality. I had to understand that in seeing and hearing what I wanted to see and hear from Barack Obama, I set myself up for a severe and jolting disillusionment. As President, Barack was not invested in revenge, repudiation and rejection of the self-inflicted 8-year curses a majority of the Ameican voters had twice handed the rest of the country.

Invested in my liberal version of revenge and repudiation, I refused to see Obama as he had always been and never stopped being. He had led me on in that I allowed his speeches to encourage me to vote for him based on my assumption that he and I were on the same page ... when in reality we were not.

My disappointment, however, was greatly assuaged by an expectation of mine that was not disappointed.

Barack Obama - along with his centrist approach that I had not desired nor perceived - brought competence back to the presidency. He brought back intellectual honesty that was not driven nor supported by handlers and manipulators who had conspired to install a semi-intellectual Texan with Ivy League roots in the White House.

That was important to me because whether he disappointed me or not, Barack Obama never once led me to think he was not a capable politician; not up to his tasks and would be someone's puppet  unable to articulate his reasoning.

So for me President Obama - agree with him or disagree with him - is someone who remains predictably reliable to preside in the tradition of all wide presiders with whom I have experience.

Having said that, I want to explain why my most current Mormon political hero is not the republican candidate. Rather it is Senator Harry Reid, who has been willing from the get go to take an aggressive opposition to fellow Mormon Mitt Romney ... and for what I suspect are the same gut reasons that I have.

Senator Reid knows the type well as do I. You can see them in an almost cookie-cutter format passing back and forth between Washington and the Great Basin. Robert Bennet's loss was the country's loss and his replacement is a political joke. Orrin Hatch, whom I have not held in high regard since the early 80's, would be the wiser of the voting choice in Utah compared to the limited political range of his opponent.

I'm sure Harry Reid has seen more of the type in politics and our congregations than I have. However, on any given Sunday in almost any Mormon congregation in America one is likely to encounter some socially conservative opinion of this type expressed in Gospel Doctrine classes or other meetings.

I too have seen and intimately worked around the type within my culture and heritage over my lifetime as a social worker and political activist.

Now Americans must understand that Mormon political candidates are not considered to be among the "the Lord's anointed" and who are not to be criticized ( a practice of respect limited to Church leadership). Mormon politicians do not merit uncritical support or votes just because they share the same beliefs and particularly when the other candidate isn't a Mormon.

Politics and religion can be troublesome where one particular religion is predominant.

In the mid 60's, the Democratic congressman from Idaho, Ralph Harding,  was the commencement speaker at my high school graduation. He later lost his re-election because he spoke out against the connection between then LDS apostle (and former Eisenhower Secretary of Agriculture) Ezra T. Benson and the John Birch Society. Benson's son was the regional authority for the JBS in Utah.

His congressional record was admirable but he lost to another Mormon because in a predominantly Mormon district in Idaho, he was perceived as having dis-respected one of the Lord's anointed. That was then. Nowadays the predominant political views in the red state Rockies where the church has influence are conservative and republican.

I've seen statistics that indicate that a mere 10% of American Mormons are liberal or democrats. Harry Reid, my wife Lietta and I are three of them.

In 1968 my first voting year, I voted for Nixon and repeated that vote in 1972 because McGovern was more pacifist that righteous warrier in my view.

In 1976 I voted for Carter cause I was righteous, Nixon lied, Ford pardoned him, and Carter was religious.

In 1980 I voted for Reagan cause I thought Carter was impotent with the Iranians.

In 1984 I voted for Reagan cause Mondale was Carter's former VP.

In 1988 I voted for George Bush because Dukakis was portrayed as a doofus by Rush Limbaugh (to whom I was listening faithfully on the radio while driving around Multnomah and Clark counties)

In 1992 I voted for Clinton because it was the economy stupid and because it had become obvious that Limbaugh only knew one song but that song had 37 tedious verses to it.

By 1996, realizing that (1) The Republicans only had the Limbaugh hymn to sing and (2) I had far more liberal leanings than conservative, I voted to re-elect Clinton despite the histrionics from that right wing whiners.

So in 2000, when G.W. Bush was singing off key but faithfully as marionetted by Rovians from the Pat Robertson/Jerry Falwell hymnbook, I almost immediately recognized a real doofus when saw one. When a sitting U.S. President and his party lied to us to launch an unnecessary invasion of Iraq, my inner liberal became my crusted hard and scarred outer shell.

If anyone who knows me thinks my opinions have changed or mellowed from the first days of my entry into public activism ... it should be obvious by what I say and do that if anything I have become more predictable and aggressive in my opinions.

In my opinion, the same can be said for candidate Romney.

If you think somehow that a sober, serious and statesmanlike sense of kindness, tolerance and social justice has somehow alighted on his politically aspiring shoulders in these past few weeks or months ... you are naive and whistling in the dark.

That same tactless and arbitrary spirit that has been part and parcel of his style - the spirit he has manifested many times during the campaign when responding to people who disagreed with him - that same spirit would be with him in his new exaltation should he win.
"Boston Spirit magazine reported last month that when gay activists met with him in his office in 2004, as Romney was backing a failed constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage in the state, Romney remarked, 'I didn't know you had families.' 
Julie Goodridge, lead plaintiff in the landmark case that won marriage rights for gays and lesbians before the Supreme Judicial Court, asked what she should tell her 8-year-old daughter about why the governor would block the marriage of her parents. 
According to Goodridge, Romney responded, 'I don't really care what you tell your adopted daughter. Why don't you just tell her the same thing you've been telling her the last eight years.'
Romney's retort enraged a speechless Goodridge; he didn't care, and by referring to her biological daughter as 'adopted,' it was clear he hadn't even been listening.
By the time she was back in the hallway, she was reduced to tears. 'I really kind of lost it,' says Goodridge. 'I've never stood before someone who had no capacity for empathy.'" - Michelangelo Signorile Editor-at-large, HuffPost Gay Voices

I suspect that many Mormons who know me are mystified by my hostility towards this particular Mormon politician and that is not something over which I have any control or desire to control. The one thing we cannot do is control how our words and attitudes are perceived by others no matter how hard we try.

It seems much safer to simply accept the idea that honesty is the best policy. The safest thing I can do for anyone who gets close to me - especially if flames are shooting from my eyes and lips - is to flat out declare that what you see and hear from me is who and what I am.

I have no problems with a Mormon becoming President of the United States. But not this particular Mormon candidate at this particular time.

if this particular public morality sense is pervasive

If this isn't a "party" thing that contrasts the social philosophy of each party and if this particular public morality sense is pervasive... then I really would like to know how many democrat candidates agree with these republican candidates.

15 GOP Candidates Oppose Abortion Access for Rape Victims

a fair fight

A corporation is a person ... per some of the more big business types among us.

So how many of us persons would it take to donate the equivalent amount the single Chevron "person" donated so we could make the influence on government decisions a fair fight.

Chevron Donates $2.5 Million To GOP Super PAC In Single Largest Corporate Donation 

just because he and the candidate are both black

Right ...
... not because he's experienced, not because his military credentials are totally legitimate as compared to the republican who was riding bicycles in France when Powell wore his uniform, not because he's been closer to American foreign affairs than anyone on the republican's staff

... but just because he and the candidate are both black.

Using that logic, I could justifiably diminish and dismiss any old white guy with tons of credentials who has endorsed the republican

... just because they are both white. There would be no difference in such a dismissal in any way.

Proceed Governor

I do agree with at least one response I heard in the debates.

Regarding one candidate who wants to lead the country's foreign policy - via spending 4% of our GDP on military might - right up to and then through the gates of hell

... and the other candidate remains calmly seated and says, "Proceed Governor."
... I'll stick with the latter.

Thursday, October 25, 2012

Lying for the Lord

... anyone in any religious context
... who tells you that if marriage equality becomes a reality, churches will be required to perform gay marriage
... that person is trying to lie for the Lord
... wanting you to believe that the Lord approves of such lying behavior
... and that liar thinks that you are gullible.

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

15 Differences Between Democrats and Republicans

One perspective on party differences. Of course there's a bias here. Would like a comparative response.

15 Differences Between Democrats and Republicans

Excerpt examples of a few of the 15:

Republicans fear that the government has too much control over corporations. Democrats fear that corporations have too much control over our government.
Democrats believe it benefits all of us to help the weakest and the poorest among us. Republicans believe it benefits all of us to help the wealthiest and most powerful among us.

Democrats believe everyone is entitled to health care regardless of their ability to pay. Republicans believe everyone is entitled to jack squat if they can’t pay for health care. 
Democrats believe our health care system exists solely for the purpose of making people healthy. Republicans believe our health care system exists solely for the purpose of making a healthy profit.
Democrats believe anything that helps the American people during a recession or a time of crisis is the true essence of patriotism. Republicans believe anything that helps the American people during a recession or a time of crisis is the true essence of communism.
Democrats believe the President and Congress need to work together to create jobs during a weak economy. Republicans believe that Congress should do nothing to create jobs and then blame the President.
Democrats believe that too much money in politics produces corruption and destroys the American way of life. Republicans believe that money and corruption in politics are the American way of life.

when crooks and liars started an unnessary war and broadcast betrayal became more blatant and apparent.

Guess we are part of a dying breed ... but for anyone even curious to know about how inner fires get lit and what fueled them for so long, I introduce you to the original online tribe with whom we aligned ourselves when crooks and liars started an unnessary war and broadcast betrayal became more blatant and apparent.

Netroots Bloggers Mark 10th Birthday In Decline and Struggling for Survival

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Wanna Have McKenna Try that in Our State?

I see where Republican guvnor candidate McKenna's role model, the union-busting Doofus Govnor of Wisconsin, is now 0 for 2 with the courts.

Per the Associated Press ... "MADISON, Wis. — A judge has rejected the state of Wisconsin's request to put on hold his earlier ruling striking down large portions of Republican Gov. Scott Walker's contentious collective bargaining law.

Dane County District Judge Juan Colas on Monday released his ruling rejecting the request for a stay.

Colas in September ruled the law stripping most public workers of nearly all their union rights violates teachers and local government workers' free speech, free association and equal protection rights.

Saturday, October 20, 2012

the SPLC is someone with much loftier goals and ideals than the AFA ... which serves no socially redeeming benefit

Today's entry for the silly section ...
the American Family Association that refers to the Southern Poverty Law Center as "the homosexual activist group."
Go to the SPLC to try to figure out how and why the AFA describes good people as bad and you can see that the SPLC is someone with much loftier goals and ideals than the AFA ... which serves no socially redeeming benefit and accomplishes nothing more than a bigoted give away of doofus poop.

Southern Poverty Law Center

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

.. avoid using the word "binder" in any kind of campaign sentence.

Just like Kahn and just like Kirk said ... "You just .. keep .. missing .. the .. target"

Frankly, if I were a part of the stragedy team I'd tell them to avoid using the word "binder" in any kind of campaign sentence.

After last night, the women voters in this country are already programmed to think of something else entirely when the word shows up. Attempting to patch a hole in the inner tube with the same word will only get the duct tape too wet to seal the leaking out-go.

Women Unbound

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

McKenna is not a friend of Washington's middle class or aged

It goes without saying though and after seeing a doofus political ad for governor in this state ... the same mind set that lost the debate to Obama tonight is running for governor in Washington against Jay Inslee.

No matter the back pedal, do not forget that McKenna was part of those earliest partisan Republican AG's who jointly and partisanly tried to litigate against healthcare reform.

McKenna is not a friend of Washington's middle class or aged.

Friday, October 12, 2012

a radically utopian vision that rests on a blind faith that markets are essentially part of the natural order.

Look stuff up ... read it ... ponder it ... pray about it ... and don't worry about those who disagree with it regardless of who they are. You return and report to yourself the results of your search. Then not for me, not for anyone else who might feel you must please them ... you decide for yourself.

Blind Faith as Profit Engine: How Free Market Worshipers Use Christian Utopianism to Bilk the Middle

Weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth over a rude Vice Presidential bully

How many times do we see during basketball and football games in particular a player penalized or actually thrown out after retaliating to a low-blow from an opposing player, only to get whistled by the ref who did not see the original infraction?

Apparently there's a lot of Republican stage-outrage at Joe Biden's ruthless and rude debating  behavior. I see in the online comments lots of opinions that Biden was a bully and a mean person to that wide-eyed Ryan politeness.

Bill Maher expressed it this way, "9-1-1? There's an old man beating up a child on my TV."

Seems to me that in this regard as I watched Joe Biden call Ryan out, I was watching John Wayne go after the shyster capitalist rancher.

On Ryan's wide-eyed politeness...

Seems to me that from the first day of Obama's presidency the entire Republican party started a bar fight based on what Jon Stewart calls Bullshit Mountain ... and have kept it up ever since.

The recent Republican presidential nominating campaign was nothing less than a continuation of that bar fight with the most punches being thrown against a straw-man version of Obama that does not exist.

The moderator question last night about the negative campaigning toward the end of the debate was spot on and useful.  The answers predictably were not much more than calmer versions of that very negativity.

Partisan weepers and professional pundits decry Biden's behavior against one of the poster boys for the straw-man bar fight with his obstructionist record in the House as an ideologue for the party of NO! ...

no constructive jobs proposals of their own and essentially - as Senator Mitch McConnell condensed the party attitude with his vow to limit Obama to a single term

"We got nothing and we ain't helping Obama!"

Stepping into that loudmouth bar fight is something spineless Dems should have been doing from day one.

In that regard, Ryan was right during the debate when he referred to those Dem party majorities in the early years.

Obama's sense of expected bi-partisan cooperation from Republicans and his party's willingness to go along, trust the process and assume Republican non-partisan cooperation in the interest of the public good turned out to be an idealistic pipe dream.

The bar fight should have been taken up in earnest from the get-go since a bar fight is all Dems got  from Repubs.

It seems to me that the Dems could have accomplished much more with an aggressive response to that  mad-dog barking that might have gotten Repub attention early on rather than encouraging the subsequent partisan blocking tactics ... and perhaps achieved more constructive results.

It also seems that the result has been Republican claim of innocence of any infraction and a pretense that nothing wrong was done.

The Dems are only being rude when they challenge the Repubs now.

We are now being told that Dems are not being polite.

Repubs are asking voting referees to see only the second infraction, not the first.

There’s an old line attributed to Bill Clinton: It’s hard for the other guy to talk when your fist is in his mouth.

I liked last night's debate.

It felt good, like watching John Wayne go after the ranch-stealer in Rio Lobo

Biden finally knocked over the card table, backed the shyster into the corner and called him and his party out.

10:45 AM Update with which I agree from William Rivers Pitt:
Anyone who tells you the vice presidential debate was a tie, or that Mr. Ryan prevailed, is trying to sell you a diamond mine that ain't worth a dime. The ultimate impact and import of what went down during Thursday's debate won't be immediately known, but the simple fact is beyond dispute: Joe Biden owned the night, and owned his opponent, in a way rarely seen in modern debate history.

Monday, October 8, 2012

Give up your culture, your heritage, and embrace our Kindergarten Konservatism

For Kindergarten Konservatives, English is not the original native tongue of this land.

Only the morally lazy would suggest we force others to lose theirs and accept ours and call it civic wisdom.

Lakota: The Revitalization of Language and the Persistence of Spirit

Cause the Point of a Gun was the only law that Liberty understood

Suggested reading that ought to be required for any and all who believe "peace" spread globally with the point of a gun is somehow exceptionalistically moral for anyone in general and heroic posturing American super patriots in particular.

Chris Hedges: The Maimed Among Us

Friday, October 5, 2012

Pesticide Giants Versus the Little People

In this corner ... check out the list of donors on each side. There's a message all by itself. Come on Konservative Kapitalists ... surely you can find an alternate comparative that be-knights and be-nobles these Corporate Welfare Queens

Pesticide Giants versus the Little People

Crackpot Job Truthers of the Country. Unite!!

When the report isn't good for your angle ... and birtherism makes everyone change channels or just plain fall asleep ... trot out another gimmick ... this time the old favorite: c-o-n-s-p-i-r-a-c-y.

Jack Welch in particular has never been on my list of admired corporate jockeys. His shtick has always been with the crowd that whips the horse until it can go no further and collapses ... then blames the horse for the resulting failure.

Crackpot Job Truthers

Tuesday, October 2, 2012

beat their chests about how patriotic opposition to marijuana makes them civic heroes

A Marijuana Revolution in the Making on Election Day

I support the reefer rebellion. Our politicians have much better things to do than beat their chests about how patriotic opposition to marijuana makes them civic heroes. Not to mention how many non-criminals sit in our expensive prisons cause they're friends with pot.

If one is to believe the latest polls, Washington will become the first state to re-legalize the adult use of cannabis by plebiscite. According to a just-released Survey USA poll , nearly six out of 10 voters now express support for Washington’s Initiative 502. According to the survey, 57 percent of respondents stated they intend to vote yes on I-502; 34 percent said they intend to vote no, and nine percent were undecided. Men and women are equally supportive of the initiative.

Friday, September 28, 2012

the kind of capitalist return we expect?

We could be but we ain't. And is the return on our "investment" in gunpoint diplomacy and global economics getting us the kind of capitalist return we expect ... that ain't happening either.

A good reason to vote for Mitt in case you own a yacht

Here's a good reason for a vote for Mitt if you happen to own a yacht. Quote is Bill Marriott (a famous hotelier) introducing the candidate at a fundraiser last night.

Both Mitt and I have summer places up in New Hampshire on Lake Winnipesaukee. And a few summers ago I was taking my grandchildren and children to town in the boat for ice cream. 
And we got into the docks and they were all full and I looked around, there was no place to park, so we stopped at the end of a dock. They all jumped off and ran up the dock. And I realized there was nobody in the boat to help me dock the boat, handle the ropes, do anything -- they just left me out there at sea.
So I finally found a place to park after about 20 minutes, and I pulled in,
I said, 'Who's going to grab the rope?,' and I looked up and there was Mitt Romney.
So he pulled me in, he tied up the boat for me. He rescued me just as he's going to rescue this great country.

Thursday, September 27, 2012

On Tax Cuts, Jobs and Promises Promises

Candidate Romney is not promoting a unique and original economic idea based on his experience and wisdom obtained as a businessman and CEO at Bane Capital (misspelling is intentional on my part.)

Tax cuts intended to increase revenue which then generates jobs and leads to a  healthier economy is a tried-and-failed conservative talking point that was seriously attempted by both Ronald Reagan and G.W. Bush.

Candidates Romney and Ryan are asking Americans to let Republicans try it one more time, promising results that have proven to be essentially un-achievable using the failed formula.

What follows, if we buy into the tax cut, jobs and fairy tale idea is the implication that higher taxes in and of themselves are the principle impediment of economic growth.

This all sounds pretty but in reality, as do most theoretical plans that assume so much more than can be delivered, the very volatile and unpredictable facts of human nature disallow any serious expectation of control over the results of such a massive experiment in which risk is but a minor tool and outcome will be a result of ideologically controlled micro-management.

Economic stimulation prompted by tax cuts then is supposed to drive up revenues to pay for the tax cuts. This is the crux of Candidate Romney's worn out Republican promise that famously failed with the Reagan and Bush implementations.

Following the Reagan and Bush Sr. failures - to the chagrin of Republicans - Bill Clinton took a measure to reduce the deficit that certainly was not helped much by the failed experiment. Clinton's deficit reduction act contained the "largest tax increase in history."

Conservatives responded hysterically with hand-wringing outrage about a major step backward from the forward movement of trickle-down economics (more famously described originally by Bush Sr. as Voodoo Economics.)

But the result was a dramatic increase in revenue – far more pronounced than the eventual increases in revenue that had come to pass under Reagan.

Romney and company might insist that economic growth drove up those revenues, but such a notion would have to oppose the basic tenets of tax cuts as the cause of greater revenue and more jobs.

Clinton raised tax rates at the highest level and guess what? The economy looked more like what Romney promises by doing the opposite of what worked. The economy proved itself to be more than a mere responder to faulty tax-cut notions.

Worse, tax cuts which cause budget deficits aren't the real thing. They essentially amount to deferring tax revenue which might normally be used to act responsibly, affording an opportunity to function more readily in a pay-as-you-go mode.

Tax cuts only put off keeping the bills current by putting off when they get paid. That might be the corporate welfare way but it is not a method that has proven to be a winner with all the mom and pops and kids and grandkids who have learned the hard way that it's better to pay as you go.

Call it what you will, "trickle down," "voodoo" or "teapickle" the idea Romney and Ryan espouse is to hand more money to the rich who will then wisely and unselfishly invest in business and create jobs. It hasn't worked before and in a worsened national economic circumstance where holistic and preventative medicine is needed, Romney/Ryan want to break out the leeches and generate more bleeding.


What the wealth-bearing capitalists do with tax cuts is theirs to decide, theirs to own, and theirs to keep or risk as they see fit. I doubt that we'll see investment in new businesses, expanding businesses, new equipment, research and development or anything else if there's no demand.

Demand is what moves people to both buy and sell. Receiving a tax cut is insufficient motivation to pour that gift revenue into products and services for which there is little demand, enthusiasm and most-significantly, ability to purchase, use or consume.

Why would a tax-cut recipient invest in greater production capacity if no one is out there with money to spend? Not to mention all the other lucrative things you can do rather than risk investing in something that might create more jobs ...  because you are a grateful and patriotic capitalist who is willing to put the money where the conservative mouths say it should be put.

Why invest in job-creation enterprises when you can invest in commodities, foreign exchange and government bonds? Or you can buy stock for the sake of stock, which in and of itself does not represent a new job but rather, someone else's cash cow.

My bottom line is not the idea that higher taxes will always benefit the economy. Such would be the political mirror image of the assumptions made by tax-cut politicians.

The truth of the matter seems to be that the correct blend of hands-off and hands-on management is the key to leadership. That one learns to drive the massive, bulky hard-to-steer economic wide-load tractor trailer by actually driving it.

If among candidates you can find someone who has done that without himself tipping over the equipment, you are better off.

The alternative is taking a chance on the other ... who CEO-drove a comparative economic tricycle but  who now tells us that he can climb on the big one, put the pedal-to-the metal and accelerate using the failed and discredited tax-cut ideology of the past.

And he wants use to rehire that same maintenance crew that for the past four years has accomplished nothing but obstruction.

Saturday, September 22, 2012

The 47% Moocher Class

Thinking aloud ... without the considerable contribution of labor and consumption to the American economy by the so-called 47% Moocher Class ... rich, capitalist fatheads would be nothing more than mere fatheads.

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Welfare Recipients

Good photo ... the idea of corporate welfare is too intellectual for most gullible Americans and stuff like this tends to go right over their heads. 

Abstractions are too difficult. 

It's easier to worry about birth certificates, voter ID's and talented idols than about who really gets the most welfare in America."

Friday, September 14, 2012

Mitt and the PNACers

Who the hell are the PNACer's you ask? Well the New Yorker (what the hell do them eastern stablishment elitists know anyway?) has updated the file with an article yesterday. I've added the link at the bottom of my page cause I invite you to read what I learned about the PNAC (Project for a New American Century) and wrote more than 8 years ago. To wit,

The PNAC Gallery
July 1, 2004
Project for a New American Century
Awhile back the Little Woman figured out how to get my mind offa some things (her) and on ta other things. She bought me a computer and got the local dial-up guy ta show me how ta git on the Internet. Once I got the hang of it, among other things, I discovered Google and Google News (what a dang goofy-soundin name), and started enjoyin myself. Danged if I wasn't becomin an informed electorate!
"So," she told me with that look she gits, "you wanted to know what a neocon is? Well honey, paste this URL ( and click "go." 
So I did. I clicked, I saw The Project For the New American Century (PNAC), and I read. I even kept readin after I realized I'd spend my time in a better way by fishin or chasin after the Little Woman... 
Dang! I think PNAC must be one of them there Ivory Towers I've heard about from time to time. Only this tower don't even sound like ivory to me, more like some kinda fragile rose-colored glass. 
I read their declarations about what they think they know and what they think they stand for. And I read their letters to Mr. Clinton and Mr. Bush goin back to 1997. I read all their big plans involvin how we need to police up the trouble spots around the world cause we're the toughest thing next to the Almighty on this planet. 
These PNAC Galleryites seem to think that the world is like recess at grade school and the U.S. of A are the biggest toughest Sixth Graders than run the schoolyard. All them fifth graders and younger better do what we say. We only let them other kids play what we want em to play, where we want em to play and when we want em to play. 
PNAC'ers look like the kinds of intellectchals I could beat at Combat Scrabble. They'd be spendin too much time trying to put together eleven-letter words and I'd be cleanin up with my little threes or fours. 
And what they've been writin! I suspect that in order to get accepted into the club ya have to have credenchals - ya know - the kinda things that mean you're smart or know what yer talkin about. I'll bet you that you aren't even CONSIDERED to be worthy of joinin that club until you've played and won at least 10 games of Monopoly and 10 games of Risk. 
And the way some of em write, to win 10 games of Risk they had to play at least 100 times. That would explain all that high-falutin writing about economics and "America's Global Responsibilities." 
Whatever happened to our honorable thinkin that we don't start wars, we end em? 
About a year ago one them eleven-letter-word guys named Schmitt wrote about Shock'n and Awe'n and compared America to Marshall Will Kane in the movie "High Noon," as some sort of warrior who can't get the other townfolks ta help im. 
Made me remember a better movie to illustrate what America has stood for: The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. In that one, John Wayne got rid of the bad guy - Lee Marvin - and then minded his own business while James Stewart, the lawyer politician, cleaned up the mess and made the community a better place. 
I'm downright curious as to how many of them folks in that glass tower has actually wore a military uniform and got it dirty. They talk fast and loose about American military power wandrin about all over the world cleanin clocks and tellin tyrants how the cow ate the cabbage. 
Mr. Chaney says he had other priorities when he had the same chance during his prime manhood age to join up like a real patriot. I hear today that this real patriotic draft avoidin vice president is slanderin Mr. Kerry while Mr. Bush has been pretendin that he looked like Mel Gibson in Braveheart when he was young enough to become a real warrior. Makes me laugh even tho it ain't no laughin matter. Danged campaign commercials have gotten tedious and embarrasin. 
When PNAC'ers talk about it you get the idea that troops don't mean nothin more to them than the little red, white and blue wood blocks in the Risk Game or the little green plastic houses and red hotels in Monoply. Seems like to these guys livin breathin troops don't exist - only wooden blocks. 
Seems like to these guys people who lose jobs or try ta live without medical benefits are nothin more than little metal top hats, race cars and horses. 
These ain't the guys you'd want on a camp out, that's fer sure. Take them along and you'd have to chop all the wood, build the fire, help em put up their tents, and sing cowboy songs to em when it gets dark, quiet and scary in the woods. Probably have to bait their hooks, untangle their lines and hold their hands while they reel in a fish. 
Dang certain I'd have to gut the fish for em since there'd be guts involved. 
Their statements and their letters to Mr. Clinton and Mr. Bush were all signed (well, their names were at the bottom). In the 1990's those names included Chaney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Perle - all names I recognize from the news as PNAC members doin the thinking for Mr. Bush.

I'm tellin ya, these drug-store warriors ain't the ones we oughta be trustin. 
Well, I'm curious now. Think I'll go get Google to show me all the smart things Flush Limbaugh, Squawk Hannity, Factor O'Reilly and Anxious Coulter have said lately. It don't seem that any of them have yet qualified by winnin their ten games of Monopoly and Risk.

New Yorker on Romney and the PNACers


Well, it is widely thought that Romney’s political advisers aren’t the brightest bulbs—his entire campaign has been a litany of errors. What has been less remarked upon is the makeup of Romney’s foreign-policy team. For a former businessman who claims to willing to hire the best and smartest regardless of background, it is a remarkably unimpressive and ideologically driven group, consisting largely of washed up neocons and Cold Warriors, many of whom served in the Administration of George W. Bush.
On a day-to-day basis, Romney’s foreign-policy point man is Dan Senor, a former spokesman for the American government in Iraq, who wrote a book about Israel’s economy that Romney often cites. Senor, a longtime neocon, often travels with Romney. On Tuesday, according to a report from ABC News, he was travelling with Paul Ryan in order to brief him along with Reuel Marc Gerecht, another well-known neocon, and Jamie Fly, who worked at the National Security Council under George W. Bush. John Bolton is another important player in the Romney team. Often dismissed even on the right as a hirsute blowhard, Bolton appears to have persuaded Romney to take him seriously. A third influential adviser is Eliot Cohen, a professor at Johns Hopkins, who once worked for Paul Wolfowitz. Then there’s Bill Kristol, the editor of The Weekly Standard, who is also said to have Romney’s ear.
Kristol, Bolton, Gerecht, Cohen, and several other of the people who are listed as informal advisers on Romney’s Web site are former members of the Project for the New American Century, the neocon think tank that will forever be linked to the invasion of Iraq. Conspicuously absent from Romney’s foreign-policy advisory team are representatives of the less bellicose school of thinking that dominated Republican foreign policy before the neocons showed up. A few months back, in a piece entitled “Is There A Romney Doctrine?,” David Sanger, the Times’ veteran Washington correspondent, wrote this:
Curiously for a Republican candidate with virtually no foreign policy record, Mr. Romney has made little effort to court the old-timers of Republican internationalism, from the former national security adviser Brent Scowcroft to the former secretaries of state James A. Baker III, George P. Shultz and even the grandmaster of realism, Henry A. Kissinger. And in seeking to define himself in opposition to President Obama, Mr. Romney has openly rejected positions that George W. Bush came around to in his humbler second term.

Saturday, September 8, 2012

Before you forward me any more of those silly little "We're-persecuted-because-of-our-religion" chain letters

Before you forward me any more of those silly little "We're-persecuted-because-of-our-religion" chain letters, take this little test of ten easy questions. When done, don't send it to me if you learn that - as Reverend Heath indicates -

Not only is your religious liberty not at stake, but there is a strong chance that you are oppressing the religious liberties of others. This is the point where I would invite you to refer back to the tenets of your faith, especially the ones about your neighbors.

How to Determine if Your Religious Liberty is being Threatened 

Tuesday, September 4, 2012

Dialogue With Empty Chairs Supporting Invisible Straw Men

You folks ought not be critical of dramatic heroes who debate empty chairs. Why just the other day in the Bountiful city hall three candidates took on the invisible Senator Orrin Hatch.

The long history of Americans debating empty chairs

Saturday, September 1, 2012

Enough Angry White Guys

I've said it before and you thought I was just doing the sarcastic snark. Confession time with this startling admission:

“The demographics race we’re losing badly. We’re not generating enough angry white guys to stay in business for the long term.” - Senator Lindsey Graham, (R) SC"
Senator Lindsey Graham's Republican confession.

Fear Strikes Out

"They are afraid of that which they cannot control ... they don't know how to handle it." - Michael Steele, former Chairman, National Republican Committee

Not allowing Ron Paul to speak and not publicly recognizing the votes for him ... can be described as one form of being disfellowshipped.

There's the party of the people and the party of the ...

I've said it before and you thought I was just doing the sarcastic snark. Confession time with this startling admission:

Atlanta Journal Constitution, From Lindsey Graham, Startling Honesty on Race and Politics

Thursday, August 30, 2012

National Republican Party: Vote for Scott Walker in Washington State

Washington Republicans received an interesting campaign promise at the convention this week. Get Rob McKenna elected and you can do Wisconsin all over again. Check out this report from the Seattle Times.

GOP governors association leader compares Rob McKenna to Scott Walker

But the head of the Republican Governors Association told Washington’s delegates to the Republican National Convention that McKenna would be a leader similar to Walker.
Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, chairman of the RGA, spoke at a breakfast for the Washington and Montana delegations, touting Republican gubernatorial candidate McKenna, along with Montana contender Rick Hill, as top-tier contenders in 2012.
McDonnell lavishly praised Walker as a model of leadership.

Won't that be fun. There's lots to remember about Scott Walker as an honorable statesman-like governing personality I'm told ... but the best summary of his honor-ability might be found in the transcript of the famous prank call when he thought he was talking to one of those special super political financiers named Koch but was in reality speaking with someone who was not "one of us.":

Scott Walker Gets Punked By Journalist Pretending To Be David Koch

Governor Walker in speaking of a tactic of stopping direct deposits of the paychecks of wayward Senate Democrats as a way of getting their attention.

 WALKER: You've got a few of the radical ones -- unfortunately, one of them's the minority leader -- but most of the rest of them are just looking for a way to get out of this. They're scared out of their minds. They don't know what it means. There's a bunch of recalls up against them. They'd really like to just get back up here and get it over with.
So the paycheck thing, some of the other things threatening them, I think collectively there's enough going on, and as long as they don't think I'm going to cave, which again we have no interest in. 
An interesting idea that was brought up to me by my chief of staff, we won't do it until tomorrow, is putting out an appeal to the Democratic leader. I would be willing to sit down and talk to him, the assembly Democrat leader, plus the other two Republican leaders—talk, not negotiate and listen to what they have to say if they will in turn—but I’ll only do it if all 14 of them will come back and sit down in the state assembly. 
They can recess it... the reason for that, we're verifying it this afternoon, legally, we believe, once they’ve gone into session, they don’t physically have to be there. If they’re actually in session for that day, and they take a recess, the 19 Senate Republicans could then go into action and they’d have quorum because it's turned out that way. So we’re double checking that. If you heard I was going to talk to them that’s the only reason why. We’d only do it if they came back to the capitol with all 14 of them. My sense is, hell. I'll talk. If they want to yell at me for an hour, I'm used to that. I can deal with that. But I'm not negotiating. 
"KOCH": Bring a baseball bat. That’s what I’d do.
WALKER: I have one in my office; you’d be happy with that. I have a slugger with my name on it.
"KOCH": Beautiful.
Am I implying the as governor, McKenna would employ this sort of approach to managing problems with opponents? I don't know.

The thing is that McKenna has not succeeded in demonstrating a willingness to act as a leader with his own original ideas and thinking, someone who is capable of seeking and managing conflict, reaching for consensus and compromise as the most effective means of achievement.

So far what we've heard from candidate McKenna is a lot of Republican and Tea-publican self serving ideology and sloganeering that not only reveals him as backed by someone else's magical thinking and someone else's monetary influence - folks who may very well script for him the things he should say or do.

In trying to compete image-wise Rob McKenna would be better served by a sense of independence that implies more accurately that he's totally his own man and needs no script or scripting.

Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the case.

An enthusiastic comparing candidate McKenna with sitting governor Walker (R Wisconsin) seems more like comparing a puppy-who-would-lead to a sitting hyena.

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Sifting Through The Heap

GOP campaign platform squarely behind Abstinence-Education as family planning for teens.

Abstinence-only education is based on the specious theory that teenagers shouldn’t be taught anything about sex because they shouldn’t be having sex. But promoting abstinence hasn’t worked in religious communities — a full 80 percent of evangelicals report having sex at least once before marriage — and won’t work in schools, either. The approach fails to take into account the fact that 70 percent of teenagers are sexually active by the time they turn 19, and sitting in a health class that pushes junk science won’t dissuade them otherwise. To achieve the goals the Republican Party puts forth, schools across the country need to implementcomprehensive sex education that will have honest conversations with young adults about sexuality. - Tara Culp Ressler, Think Progress

Willing to bet on how many of those platform writers composed this part based on successful personal experience with abstinence-only as teens? 

It's hard to keep the choir singing pleasing songs when some of them only sing one verse
An attendee at the Republican National Convention in Tampa on Tuesday allegedly threw nuts at a black camerawoman working for CNN and said “This is how we feed animals” before being removed from the convention, a network official confirmed to TPM.

A capitalist whining about the government not doling out enough corporate welfare to his company.

Monday, August 13, 2012

Mitt Romney says Jesus’s previous statements make him appear anti-business.

no longer my favorite guy but Bill Maher hit a home run Friday.

For a Republican candidate to not disappoint you, he would have to be Jesus of Nazareth.  And even Jesus would be toast after a few news cycles.  Because “feed the hungry”?  Sounds suspiciously like welfare.  And “heal the sick”… for free??  (wild audience applause)  That is definitely Obamacare!  And “turn the other cheek”?  Maybe you didn’t hear, Jesus, but this is the party that cheers executions.  
So here now is the short campaign timeline of Jesus Christ, Republican candidate.   
Day 3
Three days after Jesus announces he’s in, a Gingrich spokesman reports that he read Jesus’s book… and finds some aspects of it troubling.  Mitt Romney says Jesus’s previous statements make him appear anti-business.  And Rick Perry asks if America is ready for a Jewish President.     
Day 7
At the Republican debate, the other candidates pile on the new frontrunner.  Michele Bachmann calls the meek inheriting the earth a colossal expansion of the estate tax.  And Newt Gingrich scores the big zinger when he says, “Mr. Christ, America can’t afford another cheek!”   
Day 9
Teabaggers start getting e-mails from their idiot brother-in-law about how Jesus is not even from this country.  (wild audience applause) ... And was born alongside a bunch of animals in a manger.  And not to harp on it, but where’s the birth certificate?  And if he’s a carpenter, is he too pro-union?   
Day 10
Jesus is now polling fourth behind Perry, Romney, and the pizza guy.  And in a desperate attempt to gain credibility, he goes to New York and has coffee with Trump… who pronounces him, “a decent guy, but a little effeminate”.

Thursday, May 24, 2012

How can we be so forward?

Not my writing and, but something a friend forwarded:
This explains why we forward stuff:
An old cowboy was riding his trusty horse followed by his faithful dog along an unfamiliar road. The man was enjoying the new scenery, when he suddenly remembered dying, and realized that the dog beside him had been dead for years, as had his horse. Confused, he wondered what was happening, and where the trail was leading them.

After a while, they came to a high, white stone wall that looked like fine marble. At the top of a long hill, it was broken by a tall arch topped by a golden letter "H" that glowed in the sunlight.

Standing before it, he saw a magnificent gate in the arch that looked like mother-of-pearl, and the street that led to the gate looked like gold.

He rode toward the gate, and as he got closer, he saw a man at a desk to one side. Parched and tired out by his journey, he called out, 'Excuse me, where are we?'

'This is Heaven, sir,' the man answered.

'Wow! Would you happen to have some water?' the man asked.

'Of course, sir. Come right in, and I'll have some ice water brought right up.'

As the gate began to open, the cowboy asked, 'Can I bring my partners, too?'

'I'm sorry, sir, but we don't accept pets.'

The cowboy thought for a moment, then turned back to the road and continued riding, his dog trotting by his side.

After another long ride, at the top of another hill, he came to a dirt road leading through a ranch gate that looked as if it had never been closed. As he approached the gate, he saw a man inside, leaning against a tree and reading a book.

'Excuse me,' he called to the man. 'Do you have any water?'

'Sure, there's a pump right over there. Help yourself.'

'How about my friends here?' the traveler gestured to the dog and his horse.

'Of course! They look thirsty, too,' said the man.

The trio went through the gate, and sure enough, there was an old-fashioned hand pump with buckets beside it. The traveler filled a cup and the buckets with wonderfully cool water and took a long drink, as did his horse and dog.

When they were full, he walked back to the man who was still standing by the tree. 'What do you call this place?' the traveler asked.

'This is Heaven,' he answered.

'That's confusing,' the traveler said. 'The man down the road said that was Heaven, too.'

'Oh, you mean the place with the glitzy, gold street and fake pearly gates? That's hell.'

'Doesn't it make you angry when they use your name like that?'

'Not at all. Actually, we're happy they screen out the folks who would leave their best friends behind.'

Sometimes, we wonder why friends forward things to us without writing a word. Maybe this explains it:

When you're busy, but still want to keep in touch, you can forward emails. When you have nothing to say, but still want to keep in contact, you can forward jokes. When you have something to say, but don't know exactly how, you can forward stuff.

A 'forward' lets you know that you're still remembered, still important, still cared about.

So the next time you get a 'forward', don't think of it as just another joke. Realize that you've been thought of today and that your friend on the other end just wanted to send you a smile.

PS: You're welcome at my watering hole anytime.

Saturday, May 19, 2012

Ten Real Good Ways To Preserve and Protect Marriage

Thinking that citizens are better served by an insistence that gay marriage deserves more concern right now than any other national concern, The Republican Election Complex insults us. In a naively sober sanctimony, that gang – pretending to deep and profound thoughts – declares that we absolutely must defend that “sacred institution upon which this country is based.”


If God told me to fix the marriage problems in this country and gave me the power to accomplish it, I'd forget about state legislators and campaign promises. Let those who need the issue blow hard while I use divine power to achieve the miraculous:

1. I’d worry more about those couples already married than about those who want to get married. I’d be concerned and working toward seeing that they kept their jobs or, if unemployed, found good ones upon which they could economically stabilize their marriage.

2. I’d work intensely to stabilize marriage by doing everything in my power to achieve – not “work toward” – health coverage for every member of every family and every member-to-be of every family-to-be.

3. I’d work for increasing family incomes with minimum wage increases and expanding worker benefits. I wouldn’t  pretend that corporate tax cuts have created meaningful long term income opportunities for that sector of society where the largest number of marriages already exists.

4. I’d use understanding that the sacred institution of marriage is placed more at risk when it attempts to survive with inadequate housing, bottom-line cheapskate and/or corporate slumlords, and home ownership as an impossible dream.

5. I’d strengthen marriage by dropping the wide-eyed conservative clutter about increasing defense spending at the expense of social programs and remind the country that the Little Bush swagger and the “bring it on” rhetoric that started with Dubya now sounds like it spilled from the urinal in a junior high boys’ locker room. 

6. I’d take a long look and seek answers from those who truly know about failed marriages among our residents and stop thinking that unfettered capitalism includes within its framework some sort of naturally-occurring equal opportunity for every citizen to succeed in some idealized cookie-cutter manner.

7. I’d tell the amateur foreign policy conservatives shut the f*** up and give priority to our married soldiers and their spouses. I would not see world politics and economy as a giant game of RISK with our quite human single and married military population as mere wooden markers on a map. I would certainly not let theose political fools write out strategy and military checks that the children in military families – built on our sacred institution of marriage – will have to cash.

8. I’d focus on those military families and single soldiers in another significant way – I’d care about what happens when they come home and are no longer wooden markers on a map. I’d make sure that the VA is truly an effective and functioning VA – a boon to our society of veterans and something for which we as a nation can all be proud and not suspicious. I’d see to it that families and the marriages that build them are not hampered by a need for food stamps and other welfare.

9. I’d sustain our sacred institution by getting out of the business of trying to control one gender’s right to chose. If I  wanted to be seen as moral, wise and ethical, I would trust our processes of education and scientific study and encourage responsibility around human sexuality as a national concern and effort rather than a divisive argument based on polarized personal moralities.

10. I’d sustain and advocate for the sacredness of our marriage institution by educating and protecting our precious national resource of youth. Rather than prance around sounding pious and sober about gay couples, I’d march around obsessed with doing something about the factors that do greater harm to our families and their young members. I’d work to encourage the nation to turn against its domestic abusers and family abandoners in a major way.

In short I ever had the power to define marriage as “the sacred institution upon which this country is based,” I’d be ready to start encouraging an intervention in all those things that form the framework for failed marriages, failed families and ruined lives.

I’d stop pretending that the American people believe that banning gay marriages is the answer to solving the problem. I’d tell all those macho image-makers and self-serving patriarchal philosophers that marriage is incomplete without intellectual, spiritual and moral equality. I’d insist that earned income is a function of ability and has absolutely nothing to do with gender.

My ideas for this writing were originally inspired by an article by Cheryl Seal in 2004 at The Real Assault on American Marriage: 10 Top Ways Bush Republicans Have Undermined Marriage

Friday, March 23, 2012

When Prophets Speak, Critical Thinking has Ended

The two year anniversary of our current health care law is upon us. Though not as well one an comprehensive as it should have been, it is the law we are in truth stuck with and includes sufficient value to retain ... something that we should build upon.

At this time, out of my own personal disrespect, I wish to dishonor those "prophets" who - from their public pulpits - in the tradition of some sort of ancient Jeremiah, warned their gullible congregations of the doom an gloom of any non-Republican created or approved legislation.

As prophets they were either liars or just plain too dumb. To wit,

Flush Limbaugh:
It is well known -- authoritarians, totalitarians throughout history have known -- controlling the health care of a society is -- that's like the IV. You go in the hospital, they put an IV in your arm, it's there in case they need to get in, in an emergency to do something else, they've already got the pathway in. Health care is the IV to total state control over a population. Hitler knew it, the Nazis. It's one of the first things that they tried. That will be the Media Tweak of the Day. Although it's nothing new. We've said it before. [Premiere Radio Networks]
Squawk Hannity:
When government has to instill austerity measures, i.e. Greece, i.e. other places in Europe, what happens? The people rebel, they get angry. They feel like they have had the, you know, the floor pulled out from under them. "Where's my retirement?" They don't have the money, they overspent. "Where's my health care?" You have to wait six months for that X-ray. "Where's my - I'm sorry you're too old to get that hip replacement." All these things are happening in Europe. Why would they not happen here? "You're talking about death panels again, Hannity." Death panels are inevitable. [Premiere Radio Networks, The Sean Hannity Show, 1/11/12,]

Glenn Beck:
This Is The End Of Prosperity In America Forever ... The End Of America As You Know It." Telling his radio audience, "You must not allow this to pass," Glenn Beck stated in November 2009 that "they're going to get past that 60-vote barrier. And they'll get there by people like [Sen.] Joe Lieberman, who's a reasonable guy and has good intent. You'll get past it by people like that, who say, you know what? Look, we got to be reasonable; we have to have a debate. And then Harry Reid will go for the 51 count and he'll pass this thing. And it will be a nail in the coffin of America." Beck added: "You must -- must get on the phone in your districts. You must wake everybody up you know. This is the end of prosperity in America forever if this bill passes. This is the end of America as you know it." [Premiere Radio Networks, The Glenn Beck Program, 11/19/09,]

And to give credit over as broad a panel of lying prophets as possible, I propose a list containing every Congress person who opposed this law principally because it came from the opposition party and our  president.

Saturday, March 17, 2012

Monkeyin Around With Textbooks

Well, my sweet wife says that if I swear when I read somethin, I probably am dyin to say somethin too. So I better check in on them folks want our kids ta learn when they're sitting is school being confused cause they couldn't say a prayer before takin a test.

If our textbooks have got ta have stickers on them sayin such and such is only a theory, then by gum we need to apply the rule across the board startin with the 3 R's and includin the Bible.

Readin: Warning youngster - the words you're about to read are only the product of a theory and can only be proven by "faith". That means that you have to trust what you read is tellin you somethin useful. If you read a word you don't understand, look it up in the dictionary. But remember, what a dictionary says is only a theory too and it might not be true.

Writin: Warning youngster - writin is the way you make your own readin show up in words. That means that what you want to say will only be a theory and them who read what ya write are not supposed to believe your words. Instead they have to prove to themselves about what you say by "faith." 

Now faith is also only a theory that must be proven. So ya see, everything you read and write and say and do and think and feel are only theories which you must prove by faith - which is also a theory.

Gettin complicated for ya? Well that's what yer smart parents think is the best for you to grow up and be as smart as they think they are. By the way, that ain't the way they grew up to be as smart as they are.

Rithmatic: This is where it gets good. Any number you see is only a theory. So if I have two apples in my hand, that means that I'm holding two theoretical things that might or might not be apples. And an "apple" is a theory about a certain kind of "fruit" which - theoretically- is something that grew once before gettin killed by harvestin, but still tastes sweet - even if it is dead - and is good for ya ta eat. But then eatin only fer pleasure might be sinful which again is only a theory.

Anyway, I have two theoretical apples in my two hands which are theoretical products of evolution which is ... (you guessed it - a theory). Or them apples may be the procudct "intelligent design" - what some of yer parents says ain't a theory cause they read it in their not-a-theory Bible.

I don't know why the Bible isn't considered a theory but for many grown-ups it ain't. But fair is fair and if yer folks learned that the Bible isn't theory by exercisin their own faith then by gum what was good enough fer them'll be good enough fer you.

So New Rule: The Bible contains theories that must be proven by faith.

Now back to rithmatic: I have two (which may or may not be an accurate count) apples (which may or may not be apples.) And you ask me to give you one - theoretically. Now if I ain't theoretically selfish and you look theoretically needy or deservin, I might theoretically decide to "share" (a theoretical virtue) and give you one half of how many apples I'm holdin in my theoretical hands.

What's that you say? How do you know a half is really a half? You just have to take it on faith you uppity little whippersnapper.

See what I mean?

In order to make schoolin consistent and the same way all across the board, were gonna have to post a sticker on the Bible that says "Contains theories that can only be proven by faith."

Well, it's a start but I'd hate to be teachin a Sunday School class for kids or adults using these here criterias.

And what hell there'd be to pay tryin to teach kids about theoretical birds and bees whose lusty behavior has to be taken on faith.

Friday, March 9, 2012

Konservative MisKonceptions and Awakened Voter Wisdom

Why do we reject it?

Cause although we're easily distracted by fluff and loud angry noise, at heart we ain't so dumb ... especially when the message from the pretend smart guys ... those blow-hardian mind-slingers ... never changes.

It's like sitting in Sunday School 24/7 and hearing the same Fear-God-or- you'll-burn-forevey talk endlessly (a definition of what Hell must really be like.)
The Conceptual Guerilla on Cheap Labor Conservatism says it best.
"Cheap labor". That's their whole philosophy in a nutshell – which gives you a short and pithy "catch phrase" that describes them perfectly. You've heard of "big-government liberals". Well they're "cheap-labor conservatives".
 "Cheap-labor conservative" is a moniker they will never shake, and never live down. Because it's exactly what they are. You see, cheap-labor conservatives are defenders of corporate America – whose fortunes depend on labor. The larger the labor supply, the cheaper it is. The more desperately you need a job, the cheaper you'll work, and the more power those "corporate lords" have over you. If you are a wealthy elite – or a "wannabe" like most dittoheads – your wealth, power and privilege is enhanced by a labor pool, forced to work cheap.
Don't believe me. Well, let's apply this principle, and see how many right-wing positions become instantly understandable. 
  • Cheap-labor conservatives don't like social spending or our "safety net". Why. Because when you're unemployed and desperate, corporations can pay you whatever they feel like – which is inevitably next to nothing. You see, they want you "over a barrel" and in a position to "work cheap or starve". 
  • Cheap-labor conservatives don't like the minimum wage, or other improvements in wages and working conditions. Why. These reforms undo all of their efforts to keep you "over a barrel". 
  • Cheap-labor conservatives like "free trade", NAFTA, GATT, etc. Why. Because there is a huge supply of desperately poor people in the third world, who are "over a barrel", and will work cheap. 
  • Cheap-labor conservatives oppose a woman's right to choose. Why. Unwanted children are an economic burden that put poor women "over a barrel", forcing them to work cheap. 
  • Cheap-labor conservatives don't like unions. Why. Because when labor "sticks together", wages go up. That's why workers unionize. Seems workers don't like being "over a barrel". 
  • Cheap-labor conservatives constantly bray about "morality", "virtue", "respect for authority", "hard work" and other "values". Why. So they can blame your being "over a barrel" on your own "immorality", lack of "values" and "poor choices". 
  • Cheap-labor conservatives encourage racism, misogyny, homophobia and other forms of bigotry. Why? Bigotry among wage earners distracts them, and keeps them from recognizing their common interests as wage earners.

Friday, February 24, 2012

I support Marriage Equality in Washington State

Having recently accepted baptism back into the Mormon Church which is the source of my cultural and heritage identity, I did so while remaining a political and philosophical liberal in outlook and spiritual practice.

On Facebook I have joined a group called Washington Mormons For Marriage, which describes itself as
Washington Mormons for Marriage is a resource for LDS members who support marriage equality in Washington

One of the characteristics of this group seems to be the desire to emphasize the social justice aspects of Jesus' teachings as something that can be aligned at least with the socially liberal views on compassion and acceptance among many members of the Mormon Church. This is particularly true among those of us who have a concern that the Church refrain from those previous involvements in this political issue that probably did more harm than good for both the members and the Church.

Although in LDS communities in this country the division between Democrats and Republicans as well as liberals versus conservatives is seriously skewed to the right, the attitude seems to be more partisan political conservatism as opposed to genuine social conservatism.

I make no pretense of speaking in any official capacity for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. What follows is my own thinking regarding what I consider genuine religious concerns for social justice.

What would Jesus do ... really?

The classic logical next question to ask upon hearing the question “What would Jesus Do?” is, "Did the apostolic ancestors do what Jesus did when they burned heretics and falsely labeled women as witches and butchered them?"

They quoted the Bible, justifying torture and murder with Leviticus 20:27, Deuteronomy 13:3-5 and other “inerrant” verses.

Jesus quoted the Hebrew Scriptures but not those two verses and none by which he urged his followers and all believers to judge and condemn another human being. That, simply put, is not Christ-like nor godly.

If that is what is taught, does it make sense that the Divine, having insisted on Divine righteousness in the Sacrifice of his only Son, would be righteously satisfied?

... that with such evil small-minded and narrow judgmentalism all was again well with the flawed world?

Does it not serve to diminish the act of Jesus if, in fact, nothing was learned in his sacrifice except the erroneous assumption that there is a correct way to believe, that God is a nit-picking score-keeper and only in blind literalism may one be a correct Christian?

Is this not borne out in the historical persecutions of Christians against other Christians for a perceived incorrect or heretical view of the "sacred text?

Is it not true that it was the manner in which the correctness of scripture was dispensed that Jesus took exception to in his ministry in speaking against the Jewish priesthood and his willingness to die the torturous death to make his point?

Verse-citers can lick their fingers, flip back and forth and all over the scriptures, but at no point is there any scriptural verification for the notion that Jesus the Christ endorses a signature on a petition, a vote against any one person's desire to marry or the mangy efforts of self-righteous bigots to be mortal enforcers of a Divine and Willful rejection of all mortals who fall outside the born-again purview.

Nobody wants to see Christ and the sacred hung at the entrance hall of a 3 ring circus. But neither does anyone want to see Christ and the sacred hung at the entrance hall of a poorly-defined orthodoxy where the foundation of a “true faith” is based on the mind, intent and will of all the flawed self-proclaimed Christian spokes- persons?

We all seem to know where we disagree. What we don’t seem to know is whether we can learn from each other and grow from the experience.

Success in the attempt to exhort Christians to sign and vote based on faulty and inflammatory value judgments masquerading as the "Word" risks empowering the prospect for cultural regression to something uglier and far more carnal for the society as a whole then simple bedroom voyeurism.

The response I see for us is exactly what we all are doing here in this moment and for the next few months ... meet the Biblical God-talkers head on and challenge what they say and do.

Hold their feet to the fire in every way we can but in such a way as to move politics and religion further apart from each other.

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Romney ... careening toward political obscurity

He's running out of truths about his philosophy which has been discredited in Europe. Posing as a successful capitalist and implying that love-making to corporations will fix the economy and bless the common man, Romney as a caring human being is proving to be a bogus image; one easily debunked.

But that corporate capitalism and his experience buying, selling and firing was the only talking point he really had. Every other aspect of himself as an able and wise president is not evident and hard to find.
Michigan could turn Mitt into a Republican also-ran and possibly the most unrespected politician in America .

Why Romney Is Collapsing: His economic arguments are failing, and he has nothing else. 

Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Fox News Killing off it's own Pet Party

the Republican Establishment all but ceded control of the party, or at least the public face of the party, to Fox News (and Rush Limbaugh) in January, 2009.

How Fox News is Destroying the Republican Party

Still, it's becoming increasingly clear that Fox's programming and the radical, fear-based agenda it's setting for Republicans is now doing lasting damage to the Grand Old Party.
That's because Fox News isn't simply offering a rightward take on the day's events, or innocently providing Republican-friendly commentary, of course.  It's leading an exhausting, day-in, day-out attack campaign against Obama, Democrats and all their liberal allies. (Real or imagined.) 
Its relentless, paranoid crusade falls well outside the mainstream of American politics, which is why the Republican primary season, so proudly sponsored by Fox News, is shaping up to be such an  embarrassment.

and this ...

With Fox News at the irresponsible helm, the conservative movement in America, including the emerging Tea Party, became first and foremost a media movement, and one that gleefully cut ties with common sense and decency.  (See: Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh.) 
As blogger Andrew Sullivan noted this week: 
The Republican Establishment is Rush Limbaugh, Roger Ailes, Karl Rove, and their mainfold products, from Hannity to Levin. They rule on the talk radio airwaves and on the GOP's own "news" channel, Fox.
With media outlets setting the conservative agenda, as well as raising campaign funds and boosting GOP candidates, it was Fox News that quickly transformed itself into the Opposition Party.  

Doofusness; The incumbent sitting Lame Duck American President

It's a vanity issue. For Mr. Trump that means he must satisfy Mr. Hannity, Ms. Coulter and these kind folks: On Networks and ...

Popular Posts