Several years back, a woman was trampled at a Wal*Mart on black Friday when she went in to get a discounted DVD player.
This year, today, black Friday 2008, we have a shooting at a Toys R Us in California leaving two dead, and an employee at Wal*Mart in New York trampled to death.
The Wal*Mart story is absolutely gruesome. Shoppers literally pushed the glass and metal doors down on top of an employee while he was trying to open. Several HUNDRED people then stampeded across the man to get into the store. A pregnant woman was knocked down. (She was treated and released, thank God, the baby’s okay.) When police officers arrived, they found themselves buffeted by the crowd. And people were leaving with their shopping THROUGH AN ACTIVE CRIME SCENE! I wonder how many of those people should have been detained by the police. Let’s face it, if you’re reading this, and you went through the door with that employee under it, you need to go turn yourself in to the police. At the very least, you’re guilty of manslaughter.
It seems like every black Friday, in honor of Christ’s feast day (Christmas) we hear reports of violence and death at these “Black Friday Sale”s.
Doesn’t this indicate to us that we need to change the way that we’re doing things? I mean, I’m one of the first to bitch about the commercialization of Christmas, but this is beyond mere commercialization.
And yes, I’ve already heard, when I’ve talked to people about this “Well, that’s just a few examples out of hundreds or thousands of sales.” Okay, but how many people are an acceptable margin of loss before we figure out that it’s a bad idea?
Human beings seem to turn into savages on this day. LET IT GO, PEOPLE! It’s simply not that important to get to a sale before anyone else. Let’s make an attempt to turn “Turn-your-children-into-greedy-little-bitches-and-bastards” day, and turn it back into Christmas. The first step is going to be to eliminate this black Friday madness, and thereby stopping this bullshit violence…
…in the name of Christ.
Peace on Earth.
Randal
Friday, November 28, 2008
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Censorship is Alive and Well
Isn’t it amazing that you have to have a license to drive a car, own a gun, or walk a DOG, but any idiot with working genitals can have kids. That never ceases to astound me.
I bring this up because of something that happened at work today. The store that I work at sells magazines. One of the magazines that we sell is the amazingly informative and user-friendly “Digital Photographer”. I walked into the office to do some stuff today and noticed a stack of about 15 “DP” magazines on one of the desks. I flipped through it, glancing at a terrific article on black and white photography (a personal favorite), noting some very tasteful nudes on my way to this article.
I happened to bump into my store manager on the way out of the office and asked if he wanted me to display them. “No.” He responded. “They contained inappropriate images.”
Okay.
Who gets to decide what’s inappropriate, I wonder? And if my manager made this decision, rather than it being made at the corporate level, then I have to say “Shame on you. You call yourself a Christian and yet you have the gall to refer to ANY of God’s handiwork, especially something as wonderfully-wrought as the female body as “inappropriate”? Who are you to judge the work of God?”
For the record, if anyone wants to see these apparently wildly pornographic pictures, they are in Digital Photographer, issue 75, page 43.
I think that a large part of this is people who simply don’t want to explain the complexities of nudity, nude photography and sex to their kids.
I am reminded of a conversation that I had with my daughter when she was about seven. She was looking at one of my photography magazines and came across a similar photograph to these. Beautiful woman, bare-breasted, standing in a cornfield. (The woman in DP is in a courtyard and a pool, but otherwise…) Conversation went as follows:
Daughter: Daddy, why is this woman naked?
Me: Because that’s the way that they decided to photograph her.
D: Isn’t she cold?
M: (Glancing at photo) Yes, I think that she is. What do you think of the picture?
D: (Looking hard at photo) The background’s too dark. You can’t see any of the corn.
See guys? Not all that hard.
Peace.
Randal
I bring this up because of something that happened at work today. The store that I work at sells magazines. One of the magazines that we sell is the amazingly informative and user-friendly “Digital Photographer”. I walked into the office to do some stuff today and noticed a stack of about 15 “DP” magazines on one of the desks. I flipped through it, glancing at a terrific article on black and white photography (a personal favorite), noting some very tasteful nudes on my way to this article.
I happened to bump into my store manager on the way out of the office and asked if he wanted me to display them. “No.” He responded. “They contained inappropriate images.”
Okay.
Who gets to decide what’s inappropriate, I wonder? And if my manager made this decision, rather than it being made at the corporate level, then I have to say “Shame on you. You call yourself a Christian and yet you have the gall to refer to ANY of God’s handiwork, especially something as wonderfully-wrought as the female body as “inappropriate”? Who are you to judge the work of God?”
For the record, if anyone wants to see these apparently wildly pornographic pictures, they are in Digital Photographer, issue 75, page 43.
I think that a large part of this is people who simply don’t want to explain the complexities of nudity, nude photography and sex to their kids.
I am reminded of a conversation that I had with my daughter when she was about seven. She was looking at one of my photography magazines and came across a similar photograph to these. Beautiful woman, bare-breasted, standing in a cornfield. (The woman in DP is in a courtyard and a pool, but otherwise…) Conversation went as follows:
Daughter: Daddy, why is this woman naked?
Me: Because that’s the way that they decided to photograph her.
D: Isn’t she cold?
M: (Glancing at photo) Yes, I think that she is. What do you think of the picture?
D: (Looking hard at photo) The background’s too dark. You can’t see any of the corn.
See guys? Not all that hard.
Peace.
Randal
Monday, November 24, 2008
Let the Free Market Work!
Since my last post, I have received several “Shame on you”s from people about saying that we should just let the “big 3” hang.
Well, allow me to modify that slightly. What they have proven is that they are fully incapable of running their own businesses anywhere but into the ground. They proved this in the eighties when president Reagan issued long-term loans to them (I think of that as the first bail-out for the big 3), and they’ve proved it again in the nineties and this decade.
So let me put it this way…
Let them continue in business, and, yes, bail them out… but only under the following conditions…
First off, treat them as receiverships. In other words, don’t ASK those three ding-dongs to sell their private jets… MAKE them sell their private jets. And whatever other luxuries they have. THEY RUN FAILING BUSINESSES. MAKE THEM REALIZE THAT. They are private businesses. If you ran a business and it started failing, what would your first response be? To go whining for the government to bail you out because YOU’RE too dumb to run a business? No, you’d probably SELL SOME SHIT. Make these idiots sell some of the luxuries that their ill-gotten millions or billions or whatever have gotten them. Make them sell their estates and move into apartments. Make THEM pony up at least some of the dough to save their own asses, which they seem unwilling to do.
Secondly, make rules for them. You remember the Café standards that I mentioned in the last post? Put them back into place, but make them stricter. No car rolls off of the assembly line that exceeds a certain level of emissions and/or gets under thirty miles to the gallon city. Of course, RV’s and trucks would be exempt from the gas mileage rules, but a separate set of standards could be set for those. And no more Hummers or Expeditions. EVER.
Third, set up a strict repayment plan WITH INTEREST. If they fail to make their payments, treat them like any other debtor.
Fourth, require them to move the lion’s share of their jobs back to America. Everyone keeps saying that doing that would make the products too costly, but trust me – when you get to the point of “private jet” wealthy, you can afford to live a little more frugally. Alan Mulally, the CEO of Ford made four million dollars last year. But here’s the kicker – when he was hired in 2006, he was given an EIGHTEEN AND A HALF MILLION DOLLAR BONUS! So from 2006 to now, the guy has made more than twenty million dollars! And the company says that they can’t afford to employ Americans? Balderdash! Cut this dipwad’s salary to a million a year, and he’s STILL making a damned good living, and you can afford to employ Americans.
Finally… and I know that I risk sounding like a broken record here… but come up with a plan to get this money that DOESN’T require borrowing more from foreign powers or our children and grandchildren. Let’s not go further into debt bailing out businesses that have PROVEN that they can’t operate in a free market.
Now I’m back to my original point. If you can’t do this… if you can’t live by these rules… LET THEM FAIL. It’ll hurt, no question about it, but we’re Americans, damn it! We’ve lived through a depression, more recessions than I can count, a civil war, two world wars and George W. Bush. We can live through ANYTHING!
Look, we keep being told over and over again by rich people, corporations and Republicans that the free market works. Let it work!
Peace.
Randal
Well, allow me to modify that slightly. What they have proven is that they are fully incapable of running their own businesses anywhere but into the ground. They proved this in the eighties when president Reagan issued long-term loans to them (I think of that as the first bail-out for the big 3), and they’ve proved it again in the nineties and this decade.
So let me put it this way…
Let them continue in business, and, yes, bail them out… but only under the following conditions…
First off, treat them as receiverships. In other words, don’t ASK those three ding-dongs to sell their private jets… MAKE them sell their private jets. And whatever other luxuries they have. THEY RUN FAILING BUSINESSES. MAKE THEM REALIZE THAT. They are private businesses. If you ran a business and it started failing, what would your first response be? To go whining for the government to bail you out because YOU’RE too dumb to run a business? No, you’d probably SELL SOME SHIT. Make these idiots sell some of the luxuries that their ill-gotten millions or billions or whatever have gotten them. Make them sell their estates and move into apartments. Make THEM pony up at least some of the dough to save their own asses, which they seem unwilling to do.
Secondly, make rules for them. You remember the Café standards that I mentioned in the last post? Put them back into place, but make them stricter. No car rolls off of the assembly line that exceeds a certain level of emissions and/or gets under thirty miles to the gallon city. Of course, RV’s and trucks would be exempt from the gas mileage rules, but a separate set of standards could be set for those. And no more Hummers or Expeditions. EVER.
Third, set up a strict repayment plan WITH INTEREST. If they fail to make their payments, treat them like any other debtor.
Fourth, require them to move the lion’s share of their jobs back to America. Everyone keeps saying that doing that would make the products too costly, but trust me – when you get to the point of “private jet” wealthy, you can afford to live a little more frugally. Alan Mulally, the CEO of Ford made four million dollars last year. But here’s the kicker – when he was hired in 2006, he was given an EIGHTEEN AND A HALF MILLION DOLLAR BONUS! So from 2006 to now, the guy has made more than twenty million dollars! And the company says that they can’t afford to employ Americans? Balderdash! Cut this dipwad’s salary to a million a year, and he’s STILL making a damned good living, and you can afford to employ Americans.
Finally… and I know that I risk sounding like a broken record here… but come up with a plan to get this money that DOESN’T require borrowing more from foreign powers or our children and grandchildren. Let’s not go further into debt bailing out businesses that have PROVEN that they can’t operate in a free market.
Now I’m back to my original point. If you can’t do this… if you can’t live by these rules… LET THEM FAIL. It’ll hurt, no question about it, but we’re Americans, damn it! We’ve lived through a depression, more recessions than I can count, a civil war, two world wars and George W. Bush. We can live through ANYTHING!
Look, we keep being told over and over again by rich people, corporations and Republicans that the free market works. Let it work!
Peace.
Randal
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Bad for Business
Something that I saw recently made me realize why American businesses are imploding, and makes me rather pessimistic that it will ever be changed.
To rewind a little, let’s get in the Wayback machine and return to the Carter administration. During the OPEC oil embargo, President Carter and the Congress placed gas mileage standards on automobiles. In 1988, under President Reagan, these standards were largely overturned. We didn’t really notice it at the time, because we were still enjoying a minor oil boom in America.
A large part of the reason that these standards were overturned was pressure from the automobile manufacturers of America, collectively known as the “Big 3”. Chrysler, Ford and GM. They didn’t want to spend the research money on making cars more fuel efficient. So began a decade and a half of decadence in automobiles that culminated in the nauseating Hummer.
So now, twenty years later, the auto manufacturers have come begging to the American people, hats in hands, to help keep them in business after so many bad business decisions. Yes, Congress did reauthorize a gutted version of the CAFÉ fuel efficiency standards, but it was way too little, way too late.
Carter’s CAFÉ standards called for minimum fuel mileage of American cars to be increased to 27 MPG. There would be exemptions available for vehicles used for commercial use and RV’s. If the Big 3 had followed these standards, instead of lobbying so hard to get them gutted, they would now be making vehicles that competed with the fuel-efficient marvels being produced by America’s REAL “Big 2”, the two car companies that employ more Americans than the “Big 3”, Honda and Toyota. Instead, they screwed up and now expect us to pay for it.
Having said that.
I saw a clip the other day from the appearance before Congress of representatives of the “Big 3”. In this clip, a Congressman revealed that all three of these men had arrived for their inquisition in PRIVATE JETS! Then the Congressman asked for a show of hands of how many of them would be willing to sell their private jets and return home on commercial airlines. “Downgrade to first class” was how he put it. He followed that with “Let the record show that no hands were raised.”
In other words, after years of lobbying the Republican party to convince us that they needed no regulation, and the Republicans also telling us how important “personal responsibility” is concerning everything from welfare to unemployment, these guys are willing to do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to help themselves and insisting that, after being deregulated to the point that they’re killing themselves, that we need to give them money to bail them out.
Balderdash.
Let them hang, I say.
By the way, America’s corporatized media has kept insisting that they are looking to “Congress to bail them out”. Not right. It ain’t Congress’ money, folks. It’s OUR money.
Peace.
Randal
To rewind a little, let’s get in the Wayback machine and return to the Carter administration. During the OPEC oil embargo, President Carter and the Congress placed gas mileage standards on automobiles. In 1988, under President Reagan, these standards were largely overturned. We didn’t really notice it at the time, because we were still enjoying a minor oil boom in America.
A large part of the reason that these standards were overturned was pressure from the automobile manufacturers of America, collectively known as the “Big 3”. Chrysler, Ford and GM. They didn’t want to spend the research money on making cars more fuel efficient. So began a decade and a half of decadence in automobiles that culminated in the nauseating Hummer.
So now, twenty years later, the auto manufacturers have come begging to the American people, hats in hands, to help keep them in business after so many bad business decisions. Yes, Congress did reauthorize a gutted version of the CAFÉ fuel efficiency standards, but it was way too little, way too late.
Carter’s CAFÉ standards called for minimum fuel mileage of American cars to be increased to 27 MPG. There would be exemptions available for vehicles used for commercial use and RV’s. If the Big 3 had followed these standards, instead of lobbying so hard to get them gutted, they would now be making vehicles that competed with the fuel-efficient marvels being produced by America’s REAL “Big 2”, the two car companies that employ more Americans than the “Big 3”, Honda and Toyota. Instead, they screwed up and now expect us to pay for it.
Having said that.
I saw a clip the other day from the appearance before Congress of representatives of the “Big 3”. In this clip, a Congressman revealed that all three of these men had arrived for their inquisition in PRIVATE JETS! Then the Congressman asked for a show of hands of how many of them would be willing to sell their private jets and return home on commercial airlines. “Downgrade to first class” was how he put it. He followed that with “Let the record show that no hands were raised.”
In other words, after years of lobbying the Republican party to convince us that they needed no regulation, and the Republicans also telling us how important “personal responsibility” is concerning everything from welfare to unemployment, these guys are willing to do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to help themselves and insisting that, after being deregulated to the point that they’re killing themselves, that we need to give them money to bail them out.
Balderdash.
Let them hang, I say.
By the way, America’s corporatized media has kept insisting that they are looking to “Congress to bail them out”. Not right. It ain’t Congress’ money, folks. It’s OUR money.
Peace.
Randal
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Good For Business
In order to justify the corporate malfeasance of the last eight years, you’ve heard something a lot – both from Republican politicians and supporters of them. That is “What’s good for business is good for America!” In other words, let business do whatever it wants, and everything will be fine.
This is balderdash.
Let me explain.
First off, if what’s good for business is good for America, then why do we no longer allow child labor? Why do we no longer allow sweatshops? These things were GREAT for business, but sucked for America. Research the history of the Singer factory fire if you don’t believe me.
Once upon a time, if you worked in a factory and your poorly-maintained machine blew up in your face, blinding you, guess what you got? FIRED! You obviously can’t do your job blind, so they would just replace you with another expendable drone. No pension. Social security wasn’t invented until the thirties, so you were just screwed. Time to make your wife and kids go to work in a sweatshop so that your family wouldn’t starve.
Then there were workhouses and debtor’s prisons, where you had to work for corporations FOR FREE if you had an outstanding debt. These were wonderful for business, but lousy for everyone else.
A republican Senator recently commented that there is no indication in history that increased regulations improve working conditions or prevent the kind of financial meltdown that we’re having right now.
More balderdash.
We have regulations preventing businesses from unsafe working conditions. OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration is an example. And, until about six years ago, credit card companies and banks faced regulation that prevented them from loaning to unqualified people, which is what led to our current financial crisis.
You may also hear the panic-mongers scream that if we regulate businesses and force them to adhere to stricter environmental regulations they won’t be able to survive. I guess that I have a more optimistic view of the resilience of American businesses than that.
When slavery was outlawed, people said that was the end of American industry. Same thing when child labor was outlawed, when the unions were formed, when corporations had to start paying into social security, and when environmental regulations were placed on them in the seventies. And yet, somehow, they survived all of this.
Another piece of sheer nonsense is that if we take away their tax loopholes and make them pay their fair share of taxes that it will somehow hurt the American economy. We’ve been giving these gifts to corporations for the last twenty-five years or so, and watched sadly as jobs fled America.
Don’t listen to them, people. Corporations need regulation, and they need to pay taxes. And they will continue to thrive.
Peace.
Randal
This is balderdash.
Let me explain.
First off, if what’s good for business is good for America, then why do we no longer allow child labor? Why do we no longer allow sweatshops? These things were GREAT for business, but sucked for America. Research the history of the Singer factory fire if you don’t believe me.
Once upon a time, if you worked in a factory and your poorly-maintained machine blew up in your face, blinding you, guess what you got? FIRED! You obviously can’t do your job blind, so they would just replace you with another expendable drone. No pension. Social security wasn’t invented until the thirties, so you were just screwed. Time to make your wife and kids go to work in a sweatshop so that your family wouldn’t starve.
Then there were workhouses and debtor’s prisons, where you had to work for corporations FOR FREE if you had an outstanding debt. These were wonderful for business, but lousy for everyone else.
A republican Senator recently commented that there is no indication in history that increased regulations improve working conditions or prevent the kind of financial meltdown that we’re having right now.
More balderdash.
We have regulations preventing businesses from unsafe working conditions. OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration is an example. And, until about six years ago, credit card companies and banks faced regulation that prevented them from loaning to unqualified people, which is what led to our current financial crisis.
You may also hear the panic-mongers scream that if we regulate businesses and force them to adhere to stricter environmental regulations they won’t be able to survive. I guess that I have a more optimistic view of the resilience of American businesses than that.
When slavery was outlawed, people said that was the end of American industry. Same thing when child labor was outlawed, when the unions were formed, when corporations had to start paying into social security, and when environmental regulations were placed on them in the seventies. And yet, somehow, they survived all of this.
Another piece of sheer nonsense is that if we take away their tax loopholes and make them pay their fair share of taxes that it will somehow hurt the American economy. We’ve been giving these gifts to corporations for the last twenty-five years or so, and watched sadly as jobs fled America.
Don’t listen to them, people. Corporations need regulation, and they need to pay taxes. And they will continue to thrive.
Peace.
Randal
Monday, November 17, 2008
You've Gone Too Far
This blog entry is addressed to the faction of the republican party that the so-called “moral majority” brought into the party to elect Ronald Reagan in 1980, okay? The rest of you can put your fingers in your ears and go “la la la la la” until I’m done.
That’s right. I’m addressing the redneck, snake-handling, inbred hillbilly faction of the republican party.
The democrats have been mollycoddling you… and I admit that I’ve been mollycoddling you right along with them… and it’s over now, all right?
I’m going to speak plainly to you, and in a politically incorrect fashion, because I’m tired of your bullshit.
I want to say that you people should be ashamed of yourselves. I hope that your mother scolds you thoroughly every time that you open your mouth. I know that if I spoke in the kind of disrespectful, empty-headed, small-spirited way that you guys do, my mom would wash my mouth out with soap. And not just any soap. LAVA! Have you ever tasted Lava soap? It’s the worst! You gargle with dog poop after you’ve had it to get the taste out of your mouth!
So what am I talking about?
I’m talking about the disrespect that you hillbillys are showing to President-elect Obama. Especially after screaming for eight years that to show disrespect to the chief executive is to show disrespect to America itself.
It was bad enough when you morons screamed “terrorist” and “kill him” at a political rally, and hillbilly queen Sarah Palin didn’t call you out for it. It was bad enough that a church reader board had the idiotic question “Osama… Obama… hummm… are they brothers?” on it during the election. What would Jesus do? NOT THAT! It was bad enough that the Karl Rove misinformation machine had that one poor little old lady convinced that Obama was an “Arab”. Nothing wrong with Arabs, that’s just misinformation. The same machine had one poor guy at a McCain rally convinced that his children would not be safe in an America where Barack Obama was president. It was bad enough that you boo’d the president-elect’s name at Senator McCain’s concession speech. Did you idiots see the look on his face when you did that? He is an intelligent, sensitive man and you guys were hurting him by doing that. Of course, that pain may be penance for making the mistake of hiring Karl Rove, a man who assassinated HIS character in 2000 to run his campaign. It was BEYOND bad enough when Mr. Broun compared president-elect Obama to a Nazi.
Now… NOW… you people have crossed a line.
By birth, I am a southerner. And I have done nothing over the years to hide that fact. I love southern cuisine and constantly have sweet tea in my fridge. I retain a slight hint of an accent that comes out most prominently when I am tired or stressed. Right now, if I were reading this aloud, you would hear my southern very clearly.
But now… you people make me ashamed of being a southerner. Ashamed!
A loved one of mine in Kansas told me about a news story on her local news about a Spirit One Christian Center reader board in Wichita, KS that said “America, we have a Muslim President. This is sin against the Lord! Ex 20:3”. Exodus 20:3, for those who don’t know, says “Thou shalt have no other God before me.”
Before I start parsing the completely invalid words on this board, let me start by saying that, from my understanding of the Gospels, our Lord would not approve of this bullshit being posted in His name. Jesus was all about love and tolerance, not this kind of nonsense. And also, just to be clear here, JESUS WAS A JEW! HE WAS A MIDDLE-EASTERNER, BORN AND RAISED IN ISRAEL!
Now, to the words themselves.
Most importantly, and hopefully for the last time, Barack Hussein Obama is NOT a Muslim! He is a Christian! His grandfather was an observant Muslim. His father was a Muslim, albeit a not very observant one (he married a white Christian woman, after all). Obama is not. My father and grandfather were Catholics. I am not a Catholic. See how that works?
Next, you narrow-minded morons need to understand that the God of the Jews, the God of the Muslims and the God of the Christians is the SAME GOD! “Allah” means nothing more or less than “God”. That’s it.
The “pastor” of this church insists that the point is not (despite the words on his sign) that Obama is a Muslim, but rather that he’s not a “real” Christian because he supports the legalization of abortion. Look, clowns… simply because president-elect Obama doesn’t share your rather narrow interpretation of Christianity doesn’t mean that he’s not a Christian. You obviously don’t share my all-encompassing, all-loving interpretation of scripture, but I won’t stoop to saying that you’re not Christian. I may say that you’re a bunch of stupid assholes, but I won’t say that you’re not Christian.
Next, you guys have to understand that America is as the founding fathers designed it. It is a nation where ALL religions and those who hold NO religion are all welcomed and equal. You want to live in a Christian theocracy? Great. Research it on Google, find a country that IS a Christian theocracy and MOVE THERE!
Finally, for the sake of argument, let’s say that Obama IS a Muslim. He’s not, but let’s pretend. SO WHAT? The Constitution stipulates that no religious test is to be given for federal office, and the office of President is a federal office. WHO CARES if he’s a Muslim or an atheist or a Jew or a snake-handler or a holy roller. WHO CARES?
The propaganda outlet for you people, Fox News, claimed that Mr. Bush’s three-tenths of one percent victory in 2004 was a great mandate of the American people. So what does that make Obama’s almost six percent victory? It was a landslide. Deal with it.
One final thought. God is all-powerful, right? If God didn’t want Obama to be president, do you think that he would have won?
Grow up.
And re-read the words of Christ and do your best to live by them.
Please.
Peace.
Randal
That’s right. I’m addressing the redneck, snake-handling, inbred hillbilly faction of the republican party.
The democrats have been mollycoddling you… and I admit that I’ve been mollycoddling you right along with them… and it’s over now, all right?
I’m going to speak plainly to you, and in a politically incorrect fashion, because I’m tired of your bullshit.
I want to say that you people should be ashamed of yourselves. I hope that your mother scolds you thoroughly every time that you open your mouth. I know that if I spoke in the kind of disrespectful, empty-headed, small-spirited way that you guys do, my mom would wash my mouth out with soap. And not just any soap. LAVA! Have you ever tasted Lava soap? It’s the worst! You gargle with dog poop after you’ve had it to get the taste out of your mouth!
So what am I talking about?
I’m talking about the disrespect that you hillbillys are showing to President-elect Obama. Especially after screaming for eight years that to show disrespect to the chief executive is to show disrespect to America itself.
It was bad enough when you morons screamed “terrorist” and “kill him” at a political rally, and hillbilly queen Sarah Palin didn’t call you out for it. It was bad enough that a church reader board had the idiotic question “Osama… Obama… hummm… are they brothers?” on it during the election. What would Jesus do? NOT THAT! It was bad enough that the Karl Rove misinformation machine had that one poor little old lady convinced that Obama was an “Arab”. Nothing wrong with Arabs, that’s just misinformation. The same machine had one poor guy at a McCain rally convinced that his children would not be safe in an America where Barack Obama was president. It was bad enough that you boo’d the president-elect’s name at Senator McCain’s concession speech. Did you idiots see the look on his face when you did that? He is an intelligent, sensitive man and you guys were hurting him by doing that. Of course, that pain may be penance for making the mistake of hiring Karl Rove, a man who assassinated HIS character in 2000 to run his campaign. It was BEYOND bad enough when Mr. Broun compared president-elect Obama to a Nazi.
Now… NOW… you people have crossed a line.
By birth, I am a southerner. And I have done nothing over the years to hide that fact. I love southern cuisine and constantly have sweet tea in my fridge. I retain a slight hint of an accent that comes out most prominently when I am tired or stressed. Right now, if I were reading this aloud, you would hear my southern very clearly.
But now… you people make me ashamed of being a southerner. Ashamed!
A loved one of mine in Kansas told me about a news story on her local news about a Spirit One Christian Center reader board in Wichita, KS that said “America, we have a Muslim President. This is sin against the Lord! Ex 20:3”. Exodus 20:3, for those who don’t know, says “Thou shalt have no other God before me.”
Before I start parsing the completely invalid words on this board, let me start by saying that, from my understanding of the Gospels, our Lord would not approve of this bullshit being posted in His name. Jesus was all about love and tolerance, not this kind of nonsense. And also, just to be clear here, JESUS WAS A JEW! HE WAS A MIDDLE-EASTERNER, BORN AND RAISED IN ISRAEL!
Now, to the words themselves.
Most importantly, and hopefully for the last time, Barack Hussein Obama is NOT a Muslim! He is a Christian! His grandfather was an observant Muslim. His father was a Muslim, albeit a not very observant one (he married a white Christian woman, after all). Obama is not. My father and grandfather were Catholics. I am not a Catholic. See how that works?
Next, you narrow-minded morons need to understand that the God of the Jews, the God of the Muslims and the God of the Christians is the SAME GOD! “Allah” means nothing more or less than “God”. That’s it.
The “pastor” of this church insists that the point is not (despite the words on his sign) that Obama is a Muslim, but rather that he’s not a “real” Christian because he supports the legalization of abortion. Look, clowns… simply because president-elect Obama doesn’t share your rather narrow interpretation of Christianity doesn’t mean that he’s not a Christian. You obviously don’t share my all-encompassing, all-loving interpretation of scripture, but I won’t stoop to saying that you’re not Christian. I may say that you’re a bunch of stupid assholes, but I won’t say that you’re not Christian.
Next, you guys have to understand that America is as the founding fathers designed it. It is a nation where ALL religions and those who hold NO religion are all welcomed and equal. You want to live in a Christian theocracy? Great. Research it on Google, find a country that IS a Christian theocracy and MOVE THERE!
Finally, for the sake of argument, let’s say that Obama IS a Muslim. He’s not, but let’s pretend. SO WHAT? The Constitution stipulates that no religious test is to be given for federal office, and the office of President is a federal office. WHO CARES if he’s a Muslim or an atheist or a Jew or a snake-handler or a holy roller. WHO CARES?
The propaganda outlet for you people, Fox News, claimed that Mr. Bush’s three-tenths of one percent victory in 2004 was a great mandate of the American people. So what does that make Obama’s almost six percent victory? It was a landslide. Deal with it.
One final thought. God is all-powerful, right? If God didn’t want Obama to be president, do you think that he would have won?
Grow up.
And re-read the words of Christ and do your best to live by them.
Please.
Peace.
Randal
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Obsessive Tradition Disorder
If you went to a mental health professional and said “I tend to do the same thing over and over on a set schedule with no idea as to why I do it. What would you say that is?” I would be willing to bet dollars against doughnuts that the shrink would say “Well, those are signs of obsessive/compulsive disorder.”
Now.
Having said that.
Why do you put a tree in your house and decorate it every year? And “Because I’ve always done it” or “because it’s Christmas” aren’t acceptable answers. Both of these equal “because I’ve always done it”. Repetition of a compulsion does not make it NOT a compulsion. Why do you put a wreath on your door at the same time? What do eggs have to do with Easter, the celebration of the risen Christ? And why do you say “Easter”, when in fact, you’re trying to celebrate a resurrection day?
Do you see what I’m getting at? I get a lot of flack about not celebrating “holidays” (meaning = “holy day” when, in fact, we’ve removed just about all of the holiness from them) the same way that “everyone else” does. (“Everyone else” in this context means “me, the person making the statement”)
So why do we celebrate these holidays the way that we do, and what do they REALLY have to do with the Christian celebrations that they are meant to represent? The answer to the second question is “not much”.
For instance, we can’t really be sure when Jesus was born, but we can be fairly confident that, if the statement about shepherds watching their flocks by night is true, then it wasn’t on December 25th. Why? Because Shepherds watch their flocks by night when it’s hot so that they don’t have to suffer the heat of the day. In December in Bethlehem, the average temperature is 10 degrees Celsius, which is about 50 degrees Fahrenheit. Which means warmer than 50 degrees during the day, colder than fifty degrees at night. I tend to think that, by that statement, we should be celebrating the birth of Christ sometime around summer solstice, not winter solstice.
Which brings me back to the first question… why do we celebrate these holidays the way that we do? When the Christian church starting expanding outside of Judea and Rome, they had to make their beliefs palatable to the pagans that they were now serving. (And pagan, by the way, is not meant as an insult, nor should it be taken as one. It is from the Latin “pagani” meaning “simple folk”.) As modern conservatives who insist that there is some sort of inane “war on Christmas” have discovered, there are MANY holidays celebrated in December, and many of that many predate Christmas. So by putting our holidays in the midst of THEIR holidays made it much easier to celebrate.
All of the other things have the same sort of genesis (Greek for “beginning”). For instance, the “Christmas” tree? When Christians went into the frozen Norse lands, they discovered that every year around winter solstice, the Vikings and Vandals would drag an evergreen tree into their longhouse, and cover it with lighted candles. Not to celebrate the birth of Christ, mind you, but because they were fearful at that point that they were never going to see the sun again. So they wanted to lure it back with these smaller lights. And the evergreen, with it’s logic-defying and mind-boggling greenness in the middle of all the snow seemed like the perfect metaphor for life in lifelessness. Hence… the Christmas tree.
And the wreath? Well, the tradition that surrounds that comes from a little farther south. The Celts had a god called “The Green Man”. He was the god of nature and wildness and sexuality. When you wanted a child, you appealed to the Green Man to bless you with a child. One way to do this was to have intercourse in a wild place. I mean a thicket or glade, not on your mother-in-laws steps. Another way to do that was to make a simulacrum of the place through which we all entered the world. A hole surrounded by a thatch in other words. They did this by weaving the branches of a tree into a circular shape. I’m not ENTIRELY sure how the Christians associated this faux-vagina with Christmas, but that’s how the thing got it’s start.
And what about Easter? Well, let’s start with the name. Anybody know what Easter means? I mean the word? Anyone? No? Well, would it surprise you to find out that it’s the name of an ancient fertility goddess? More properly “Eoster”, but the pronunciation’s the same. Eoster’s day is celebrated on the Spring equinox. Now, as any learned Christian knows, Jesus was crucified the weekend after his Passover satyr (the last supper) and resurrected three days later. Passover is celebrated on the 14th day of Nisan, the first month of the Jewish religious calendar. (ALL calendars except the modern Gregorian calendar celebrate the beginning of the year at the start of spring, not in the damned stupid middle of winter.) So, we celebrate the resurrection during Passover, right? Wrong. The early church fathers had a driving need to separate Jesus from his Jewish heritage as much as possible. So how do we figure Easter, anyone know? I mean, sometimes it’s in March, sometimes April. Seems to me that I’ve even seen it celebrated in May, although I could be wrong. Anyone? No guesses? Well, believe it or not, it’s the first Sunday after the first full moon following spring equinox. I’m NOT kidding. So, when the Christians wanted to force their religion on the Anglo-Saxons, naming the celebration after their fertility goddess seemed the way to go.
And what about the egg? And the chick? And the lamb? Along with spring itself, these are all symbols of rebirth. So, even though they have nothing directly to do with the resurrection story, they seem to fit the theme. And the “Easter” bunny? Pure fertility, man. I mean, what are bunnies most known for? That’s right… like the wreath… they’re just more fucking symbolism. (Sorry, couldn’t pass it up.) My favorite line about the confusion that this clash of religions creates came from a child. When asked what we celebrate on Easter, the tyke responded that it’s the day that the Easter bunny brought chocolate eggs to Jesus on the cross.
So all that I’m asking, folks, is that you take the time to consider these traditions before you blindly follow them. That’s all.
Peace.
Randal
Now.
Having said that.
Why do you put a tree in your house and decorate it every year? And “Because I’ve always done it” or “because it’s Christmas” aren’t acceptable answers. Both of these equal “because I’ve always done it”. Repetition of a compulsion does not make it NOT a compulsion. Why do you put a wreath on your door at the same time? What do eggs have to do with Easter, the celebration of the risen Christ? And why do you say “Easter”, when in fact, you’re trying to celebrate a resurrection day?
Do you see what I’m getting at? I get a lot of flack about not celebrating “holidays” (meaning = “holy day” when, in fact, we’ve removed just about all of the holiness from them) the same way that “everyone else” does. (“Everyone else” in this context means “me, the person making the statement”)
So why do we celebrate these holidays the way that we do, and what do they REALLY have to do with the Christian celebrations that they are meant to represent? The answer to the second question is “not much”.
For instance, we can’t really be sure when Jesus was born, but we can be fairly confident that, if the statement about shepherds watching their flocks by night is true, then it wasn’t on December 25th. Why? Because Shepherds watch their flocks by night when it’s hot so that they don’t have to suffer the heat of the day. In December in Bethlehem, the average temperature is 10 degrees Celsius, which is about 50 degrees Fahrenheit. Which means warmer than 50 degrees during the day, colder than fifty degrees at night. I tend to think that, by that statement, we should be celebrating the birth of Christ sometime around summer solstice, not winter solstice.
Which brings me back to the first question… why do we celebrate these holidays the way that we do? When the Christian church starting expanding outside of Judea and Rome, they had to make their beliefs palatable to the pagans that they were now serving. (And pagan, by the way, is not meant as an insult, nor should it be taken as one. It is from the Latin “pagani” meaning “simple folk”.) As modern conservatives who insist that there is some sort of inane “war on Christmas” have discovered, there are MANY holidays celebrated in December, and many of that many predate Christmas. So by putting our holidays in the midst of THEIR holidays made it much easier to celebrate.
All of the other things have the same sort of genesis (Greek for “beginning”). For instance, the “Christmas” tree? When Christians went into the frozen Norse lands, they discovered that every year around winter solstice, the Vikings and Vandals would drag an evergreen tree into their longhouse, and cover it with lighted candles. Not to celebrate the birth of Christ, mind you, but because they were fearful at that point that they were never going to see the sun again. So they wanted to lure it back with these smaller lights. And the evergreen, with it’s logic-defying and mind-boggling greenness in the middle of all the snow seemed like the perfect metaphor for life in lifelessness. Hence… the Christmas tree.
And the wreath? Well, the tradition that surrounds that comes from a little farther south. The Celts had a god called “The Green Man”. He was the god of nature and wildness and sexuality. When you wanted a child, you appealed to the Green Man to bless you with a child. One way to do this was to have intercourse in a wild place. I mean a thicket or glade, not on your mother-in-laws steps. Another way to do that was to make a simulacrum of the place through which we all entered the world. A hole surrounded by a thatch in other words. They did this by weaving the branches of a tree into a circular shape. I’m not ENTIRELY sure how the Christians associated this faux-vagina with Christmas, but that’s how the thing got it’s start.
And what about Easter? Well, let’s start with the name. Anybody know what Easter means? I mean the word? Anyone? No? Well, would it surprise you to find out that it’s the name of an ancient fertility goddess? More properly “Eoster”, but the pronunciation’s the same. Eoster’s day is celebrated on the Spring equinox. Now, as any learned Christian knows, Jesus was crucified the weekend after his Passover satyr (the last supper) and resurrected three days later. Passover is celebrated on the 14th day of Nisan, the first month of the Jewish religious calendar. (ALL calendars except the modern Gregorian calendar celebrate the beginning of the year at the start of spring, not in the damned stupid middle of winter.) So, we celebrate the resurrection during Passover, right? Wrong. The early church fathers had a driving need to separate Jesus from his Jewish heritage as much as possible. So how do we figure Easter, anyone know? I mean, sometimes it’s in March, sometimes April. Seems to me that I’ve even seen it celebrated in May, although I could be wrong. Anyone? No guesses? Well, believe it or not, it’s the first Sunday after the first full moon following spring equinox. I’m NOT kidding. So, when the Christians wanted to force their religion on the Anglo-Saxons, naming the celebration after their fertility goddess seemed the way to go.
And what about the egg? And the chick? And the lamb? Along with spring itself, these are all symbols of rebirth. So, even though they have nothing directly to do with the resurrection story, they seem to fit the theme. And the “Easter” bunny? Pure fertility, man. I mean, what are bunnies most known for? That’s right… like the wreath… they’re just more fucking symbolism. (Sorry, couldn’t pass it up.) My favorite line about the confusion that this clash of religions creates came from a child. When asked what we celebrate on Easter, the tyke responded that it’s the day that the Easter bunny brought chocolate eggs to Jesus on the cross.
So all that I’m asking, folks, is that you take the time to consider these traditions before you blindly follow them. That’s all.
Peace.
Randal
Friday, November 14, 2008
America: Land of the Deluded and Home of the Moderately Insane
I’m not entirely sure where to begin on this, so I guess that I’ll just dive right into it.
America has lost its collective mind.
Having said that, let me be clear that I don’t like generalizations. For instance, when Michael Moore referred to Americans as the “stupidest” people on Earth, I didn’t like it. Not because I think that he’s wrong, necessarily, but because he’s not talking about Americans per se, but rather about the American public consciousness. So it’s more an imprecise generalization than an incorrect statement.
Having said THAT, let me be clear that I’m sticking with my generalization. Because I’m not talking about Americans here… I’m talking about America’s collective consciousness.
So what do I mean by that? Well, take for instance our gullibility. Again, I’m talking collectively. I’ve spoken before about how badly our bullshit detectors have been damaged from all of the spin and advertising over the last thirty years. Mine still functions pretty well, but I seem to have been born without the gene that makes us susceptible to advertising and spin. And no, my conservative loved ones, that is not a partisan statement. For instance, in our last general election here in Washington state, we had a democratic candidate for representative named Darcy Burner. Ms. Burner stated in a debate that I watched with my own four eyes that she “liked economics so much” that she “got a degree in it from Harvard”. Her opponent’s campaign discovered that she did not, in fact, get a degree in it (economics) from Harvard. She got a degree in computer sciences with a minor in economics. When I wrote to Ms. Burner’s campaign about this misrepresentation, her representative sent an e-mail to me saying that Ms. Burner had been “quite clear” about her education, and that her opponent was trying to spin the statement. Balderdash. She had been quite UNclear about her education and was now trying to spin it.
A perfect example of this is a quote that I heard today from Steve Moore, an editorial writer for the Wall Street Journal. Now bear in mind, please, that this is America’s preeminent economical publication. Mr. Moore stated that the policies of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s new deal led to the great depression in America. This set my bullshit detector off, so I took all of about a minute to do the following research: I entered “stock market crash great depression” into Google and discovered that the stock market crash that prompted the great depression was in 1929. I then entered “Franklin Delano Roosevelt inauguration” and discovered that FDR was inaugurated in 1933, four years later. We were already deep into the depression by the time FDR came into office. But how many Americans would just accept that statement at face value?
By the way, if you study logic and debate, you discover that this is called an “argument from expertise”. In other words, he’s an editorial writer for our economic paper of record, why not believe him on this economic statement? The problem is, of course, that he’s utterly wrong.
Here’s another example… show of hands… how many of you believe that Bill Clinton was guilty of any wrongdoing in the Whitewater affair? Personally, I know at least two or three people who do. And yet, the Clintons were absolved of any culpability for that not once… not twice… but THREE TIMES, the last time by Clinton-hater Kenneth Starr. So why do Americans still believe this?
Bill O’Reilly would have you believe that America is a moderately conservative country. When Jon Stewart challenged him on this, O’Reilly stated that Stewart simply had to leave New York City to discover moderately conservative America. Yes, once you get past the cities and the suburbs, Americans tend to be moderately to extremely conservative. The problem with this argument is that the majority of Americans reside in cities and suburbs. So that would make the MINORITY of Americans conservative moderates. (A quick side note: I, personally believe that the majority of Americans are either moderate conservatives or moderate liberals. I think that the extremes of either of those views represent minority views.)
So why do we still swallow this stuff wholesale? I think that it’s largely education and isolation. As you leave the cities and the suburbs, you get into areas where the people are less-educated and more isolated. Take, for instance, a boy who is raised in rural America. Maybe a high school education. No internet. Almost his entire experience of anything other than his little rural pocket of America is television. He makes his first trip to the city, and what is he confronted with? Strip clubs, sex shops and homeless people begging for money or food. He has a very negative impression of city life that he then takes home to his rural community. There are exceptions to this rule, of course. I have the good fortune of having been raised by a man who has an excellent bullshit detector despite having lived most of his life in rural America and is also a high school dropout.
I said all of that, mostly, so that I could say this.
Here is a quote from Paul Broun, republican representative from Georgia. “"It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he’s the one who proposed this national security force. I’m just trying to bring attention to the fact that we may — may not, I hope not — but we may have a problem with that type of philosophy of radical socialism or Marxism. That’s exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it’s exactly what the Soviet Union did. When he’s proposing to have a national security force that’s answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he’s showing me signs of being Marxist.” Of course, later, Broun said that he apologizes if anyone “took offense” at this statement. In other words, he’s not sorry for saying it, he’s sorry that we’re not bright enough to understand what he was trying to say.
The problem is that he said it. Have you ever seen a TV courtroom drama where someone says something on the stand and the judge directs the jury to disregard it? It’s impossible. You cannot un-hear something that you’ve already heard. And then, of course, Fox news, lapdog of the far right, took that statement and ran with it. So how many Americans now equate President Elect Barack Obama with Nazi Germany and communist Russia? Probably the same number of people who still sincerely believe that Obama is a socialist Muslim terrorist. Too many, in other words. Personally, I think that if you want to compare a presidency to Nazi Germany, you have to look back at the last eight years, and even that is an imprecise characterization at best.
Here’s what the response of sane, rational people would be… a mass call for Mr. Broun’s resignation. He’s obviously a badly deluded person with an extremely ideological viewpoint. Is that really the type of person that we need representing us?
Turn your bullshit detector on and think about it.
Peace.
Randal
America has lost its collective mind.
Having said that, let me be clear that I don’t like generalizations. For instance, when Michael Moore referred to Americans as the “stupidest” people on Earth, I didn’t like it. Not because I think that he’s wrong, necessarily, but because he’s not talking about Americans per se, but rather about the American public consciousness. So it’s more an imprecise generalization than an incorrect statement.
Having said THAT, let me be clear that I’m sticking with my generalization. Because I’m not talking about Americans here… I’m talking about America’s collective consciousness.
So what do I mean by that? Well, take for instance our gullibility. Again, I’m talking collectively. I’ve spoken before about how badly our bullshit detectors have been damaged from all of the spin and advertising over the last thirty years. Mine still functions pretty well, but I seem to have been born without the gene that makes us susceptible to advertising and spin. And no, my conservative loved ones, that is not a partisan statement. For instance, in our last general election here in Washington state, we had a democratic candidate for representative named Darcy Burner. Ms. Burner stated in a debate that I watched with my own four eyes that she “liked economics so much” that she “got a degree in it from Harvard”. Her opponent’s campaign discovered that she did not, in fact, get a degree in it (economics) from Harvard. She got a degree in computer sciences with a minor in economics. When I wrote to Ms. Burner’s campaign about this misrepresentation, her representative sent an e-mail to me saying that Ms. Burner had been “quite clear” about her education, and that her opponent was trying to spin the statement. Balderdash. She had been quite UNclear about her education and was now trying to spin it.
A perfect example of this is a quote that I heard today from Steve Moore, an editorial writer for the Wall Street Journal. Now bear in mind, please, that this is America’s preeminent economical publication. Mr. Moore stated that the policies of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s new deal led to the great depression in America. This set my bullshit detector off, so I took all of about a minute to do the following research: I entered “stock market crash great depression” into Google and discovered that the stock market crash that prompted the great depression was in 1929. I then entered “Franklin Delano Roosevelt inauguration” and discovered that FDR was inaugurated in 1933, four years later. We were already deep into the depression by the time FDR came into office. But how many Americans would just accept that statement at face value?
By the way, if you study logic and debate, you discover that this is called an “argument from expertise”. In other words, he’s an editorial writer for our economic paper of record, why not believe him on this economic statement? The problem is, of course, that he’s utterly wrong.
Here’s another example… show of hands… how many of you believe that Bill Clinton was guilty of any wrongdoing in the Whitewater affair? Personally, I know at least two or three people who do. And yet, the Clintons were absolved of any culpability for that not once… not twice… but THREE TIMES, the last time by Clinton-hater Kenneth Starr. So why do Americans still believe this?
Bill O’Reilly would have you believe that America is a moderately conservative country. When Jon Stewart challenged him on this, O’Reilly stated that Stewart simply had to leave New York City to discover moderately conservative America. Yes, once you get past the cities and the suburbs, Americans tend to be moderately to extremely conservative. The problem with this argument is that the majority of Americans reside in cities and suburbs. So that would make the MINORITY of Americans conservative moderates. (A quick side note: I, personally believe that the majority of Americans are either moderate conservatives or moderate liberals. I think that the extremes of either of those views represent minority views.)
So why do we still swallow this stuff wholesale? I think that it’s largely education and isolation. As you leave the cities and the suburbs, you get into areas where the people are less-educated and more isolated. Take, for instance, a boy who is raised in rural America. Maybe a high school education. No internet. Almost his entire experience of anything other than his little rural pocket of America is television. He makes his first trip to the city, and what is he confronted with? Strip clubs, sex shops and homeless people begging for money or food. He has a very negative impression of city life that he then takes home to his rural community. There are exceptions to this rule, of course. I have the good fortune of having been raised by a man who has an excellent bullshit detector despite having lived most of his life in rural America and is also a high school dropout.
I said all of that, mostly, so that I could say this.
Here is a quote from Paul Broun, republican representative from Georgia. “"It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he’s the one who proposed this national security force. I’m just trying to bring attention to the fact that we may — may not, I hope not — but we may have a problem with that type of philosophy of radical socialism or Marxism. That’s exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it’s exactly what the Soviet Union did. When he’s proposing to have a national security force that’s answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he’s showing me signs of being Marxist.” Of course, later, Broun said that he apologizes if anyone “took offense” at this statement. In other words, he’s not sorry for saying it, he’s sorry that we’re not bright enough to understand what he was trying to say.
The problem is that he said it. Have you ever seen a TV courtroom drama where someone says something on the stand and the judge directs the jury to disregard it? It’s impossible. You cannot un-hear something that you’ve already heard. And then, of course, Fox news, lapdog of the far right, took that statement and ran with it. So how many Americans now equate President Elect Barack Obama with Nazi Germany and communist Russia? Probably the same number of people who still sincerely believe that Obama is a socialist Muslim terrorist. Too many, in other words. Personally, I think that if you want to compare a presidency to Nazi Germany, you have to look back at the last eight years, and even that is an imprecise characterization at best.
Here’s what the response of sane, rational people would be… a mass call for Mr. Broun’s resignation. He’s obviously a badly deluded person with an extremely ideological viewpoint. Is that really the type of person that we need representing us?
Turn your bullshit detector on and think about it.
Peace.
Randal
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
The Governor Has New Clothes
Before I talk about Governor Sarah Palin for, hopefully the LAST time in my life, I need to tell another story. Don’t worry – they relate.
I have frequently heard the phrase “Let them eat cake”, but rarely have I heard it used correctly. So, since I am going to use this phrase correctly in this entry, please allow me to take a moment to explain it.
The quote is attributed to Marie Antionette, the queen of France who was executed during the French revolution. When representatives of the peasantry came to her and explained that the peasants had no bread to eat, her response was (supposedly) “Let them eat cake.” In modern times, this has been taken as a phrase of arrogance, kind of a “so what?” But that isn’t the case. Instead, it shows her ignorance of the state of the people that she ruled. It didn’t occur to her that if they had no bread then they wouldn’t have any cake either. So, ignorance, not arrogance. Okay?
Okay.
Now… for hopefully the very last time… Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska.
I read her first post-election interview today (taken in her Wasilla kitchen… appropriate, considering that’s where she seems to want to stick all women but herself). In this interview, she stated for the five thousandth time since the election that she never asked for the hundred and fifty thousand dollar wardrobe that she received during the election.
In other words, “Let them eat cake.”
I sent an e-mail to governor Palin when I read this, hoping that maybe I could resolve that ignorance for her.
The problem for most Americans, I think, is not that she asked for the clothes – she didn’t. The problem, although she’ll probably never believe this, was not the clothes AT ALL. It was about the fact that she and Senator McCain painted themselves as a different type of republican from Mr. Bush and his crowd. I don’t know how many times one or the other of them used the word “Maverick” during the last election, but I think that it would be easier to count the atoms in the stars. The problem is that spending a hundred fifty thousand on clothes to dress up “Vice Presidential Candidate Barbie” while America’s economy falls down around our ears shows a real lack of understanding of the people that she wished to rule.
As to your personal responsibility, Ms. Palin… you ACCEPTED the clothes. Whether you asked for them or not. Kind of like Senator Stephens trying to get around his prosecution by saying that he didn’t ASK for any of the gifts that he received. Whether you ask for something or not kind of becomes academic when you accept it.
Please allow me a small tangent here… WHEN THE HELL DID THE REPUBLICAN PARTY BECOME THE PARTY OF “IF YOU DON’T GET CAUGHT THEN YOU DIDN’T DO ANYTHING WRONG?! Add those two to Tom Delay who said that he couldn’t be prosecuted for conspiracy in Texas… not because he didn’t commit conspiracy, mind you, but because TEXAS DOESN’T HAVE A CONSPIRACY LAW ON THE BOOKS! Man, you turn your back on the republicans for a decade or so and they go from being the party of business and the law and order party to being a bunch of crooks who smile while they pick our pockets and fuck our kids. What the hell?
Anyway. (Deep breath, exhale…)
Ms. Palin, there has been talk of you running for president in 2012. I would STRONGLY recommend that you learn that Americans do like seeing our elected officials behave like royalty while we starve in the streets.
You have all of the cake, Ms. Palin… while the rest of us scrimp for bread.
Peace.
Randal
I have frequently heard the phrase “Let them eat cake”, but rarely have I heard it used correctly. So, since I am going to use this phrase correctly in this entry, please allow me to take a moment to explain it.
The quote is attributed to Marie Antionette, the queen of France who was executed during the French revolution. When representatives of the peasantry came to her and explained that the peasants had no bread to eat, her response was (supposedly) “Let them eat cake.” In modern times, this has been taken as a phrase of arrogance, kind of a “so what?” But that isn’t the case. Instead, it shows her ignorance of the state of the people that she ruled. It didn’t occur to her that if they had no bread then they wouldn’t have any cake either. So, ignorance, not arrogance. Okay?
Okay.
Now… for hopefully the very last time… Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska.
I read her first post-election interview today (taken in her Wasilla kitchen… appropriate, considering that’s where she seems to want to stick all women but herself). In this interview, she stated for the five thousandth time since the election that she never asked for the hundred and fifty thousand dollar wardrobe that she received during the election.
In other words, “Let them eat cake.”
I sent an e-mail to governor Palin when I read this, hoping that maybe I could resolve that ignorance for her.
The problem for most Americans, I think, is not that she asked for the clothes – she didn’t. The problem, although she’ll probably never believe this, was not the clothes AT ALL. It was about the fact that she and Senator McCain painted themselves as a different type of republican from Mr. Bush and his crowd. I don’t know how many times one or the other of them used the word “Maverick” during the last election, but I think that it would be easier to count the atoms in the stars. The problem is that spending a hundred fifty thousand on clothes to dress up “Vice Presidential Candidate Barbie” while America’s economy falls down around our ears shows a real lack of understanding of the people that she wished to rule.
As to your personal responsibility, Ms. Palin… you ACCEPTED the clothes. Whether you asked for them or not. Kind of like Senator Stephens trying to get around his prosecution by saying that he didn’t ASK for any of the gifts that he received. Whether you ask for something or not kind of becomes academic when you accept it.
Please allow me a small tangent here… WHEN THE HELL DID THE REPUBLICAN PARTY BECOME THE PARTY OF “IF YOU DON’T GET CAUGHT THEN YOU DIDN’T DO ANYTHING WRONG?! Add those two to Tom Delay who said that he couldn’t be prosecuted for conspiracy in Texas… not because he didn’t commit conspiracy, mind you, but because TEXAS DOESN’T HAVE A CONSPIRACY LAW ON THE BOOKS! Man, you turn your back on the republicans for a decade or so and they go from being the party of business and the law and order party to being a bunch of crooks who smile while they pick our pockets and fuck our kids. What the hell?
Anyway. (Deep breath, exhale…)
Ms. Palin, there has been talk of you running for president in 2012. I would STRONGLY recommend that you learn that Americans do like seeing our elected officials behave like royalty while we starve in the streets.
You have all of the cake, Ms. Palin… while the rest of us scrimp for bread.
Peace.
Randal
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Baloney for Steak
I know that I’ve asked this question before, but WHAT THE HELL HAS GONE WRONG WITH AMERICANS?
I don’t know about YOUR mom, but my mom taught me that I can expect to get what I pay for. Not more… not less. And yet somehow, Americans have come to feel that they can pay for baloney and get steak. Think back to all of the problems that we had with Chinese stuff over the last couple of years. Lead paint in the toys, mercury and lead in the toothpaste and pet food. Now’s there’s melamine in Chinese milk. Thank God we don’t import milk from China, right? Well, that same melamine has found it’s way into some canned produce that we DO import.
Why am I bringing this up? Simple. President-elect Obama has promised to close the tax loophole that allows corporations millions of dollars in tax breaks for outsourcing America’s jobs. This program, begun under Bill Clinton and processed with a vengeance under George W. Bush, has played a large part in ruining America’s economy. So, if President-elect Obama is able to fulfill that promise, what does it mean? Well, first off, that it would not be as financially sound for U S corporations to send our jobs overseas. That means that more jobs would stay in America. Yay, right? Except for the fact that American corporations repeatedly remind us of… if they manufacture products in America, the products are going to cost more. Because, God forbid that Phil Knight should cut his income by a million dollars per year or so to manufacture in the states, so he’s going to pass that expense on to you, the consumer. SO PAY IT!
That’s right folks… if you want steak… YA GOTTA PAY FOR STEAK! That’s because our laws here force employers to pay a living wage (we call it the minimum wage) and we have safety oversights in place… all of which cost money… that keeps the lead paint OFF of our kid’s toys and the melamine OUT of our milk.
Here’s the way that corporations paint this… American employees = higher cost = inflation = bad.
Before I type this next statement, I want everyone to turn their bullshit detectors on. I realize that all of the spin and advertising and commercial news in the US has caused our bullshit detectors to be damaged, but trust me – turn it on. Here’s the real equation… American employees = higher cost = larger wage base = inflation balanced by higher wages = good. What happened to us in the seventies is that we had high inflation coupled with high unemployment. That’s bad. That’s REALLY bad, and that’s one of the primary reasons that we put Reagan in office. There’s a lot of credit that’s given to Reagan for reigning inflation in. He didn’t really. What he did was to kick the outsourcing of American labor into high gear, thereby lowering the cost of goods and reducing inflation. The reason that I asked you to turn your bullshit detector on is because I want you to run this sentence through it… we cannot have the standard of living that we used to enjoy in the US and low inflation. It doesn’t work. And by standard of living here, folks, I ain’t talking about goodies. Okay? I’m not talking about how your daughter has an Ipod to match any color in her wardrobe. I’m talking about less unemployment. I’m talking about less homeless people. I’m talking about more money in our public coffers to help addicts and the mentally ill. I’m talking about quality of life, not material possessions. I think that one of the most important lessons that Jesus tried to hand down to us in the gospels is that material possessions do not make one happy.
Speaking of Jesus, I’d like to take a second here to address my fellow Christians about another benefit of bringing our jobs back from overseas.
If Bill Gates said “I’m going to open an American plant to manufacture my software. I’m going to staff that plant with twelve-year-olds, make them work twelve hours per day for a dollar an hour, six days per week,” what would our response be? “You go, Bill, because that’s capitalism, and that’s what America is all about”? I think not. I think that we would run Mr. Gates out of town on a rail. But every time that we buy goods made overseas, we make that contract. What would Jesus do, you think?
Democracy and capitalism are only compatible when the capitalism is controlled by the democracy… not the other way around.
Peace.
Randal
I don’t know about YOUR mom, but my mom taught me that I can expect to get what I pay for. Not more… not less. And yet somehow, Americans have come to feel that they can pay for baloney and get steak. Think back to all of the problems that we had with Chinese stuff over the last couple of years. Lead paint in the toys, mercury and lead in the toothpaste and pet food. Now’s there’s melamine in Chinese milk. Thank God we don’t import milk from China, right? Well, that same melamine has found it’s way into some canned produce that we DO import.
Why am I bringing this up? Simple. President-elect Obama has promised to close the tax loophole that allows corporations millions of dollars in tax breaks for outsourcing America’s jobs. This program, begun under Bill Clinton and processed with a vengeance under George W. Bush, has played a large part in ruining America’s economy. So, if President-elect Obama is able to fulfill that promise, what does it mean? Well, first off, that it would not be as financially sound for U S corporations to send our jobs overseas. That means that more jobs would stay in America. Yay, right? Except for the fact that American corporations repeatedly remind us of… if they manufacture products in America, the products are going to cost more. Because, God forbid that Phil Knight should cut his income by a million dollars per year or so to manufacture in the states, so he’s going to pass that expense on to you, the consumer. SO PAY IT!
That’s right folks… if you want steak… YA GOTTA PAY FOR STEAK! That’s because our laws here force employers to pay a living wage (we call it the minimum wage) and we have safety oversights in place… all of which cost money… that keeps the lead paint OFF of our kid’s toys and the melamine OUT of our milk.
Here’s the way that corporations paint this… American employees = higher cost = inflation = bad.
Before I type this next statement, I want everyone to turn their bullshit detectors on. I realize that all of the spin and advertising and commercial news in the US has caused our bullshit detectors to be damaged, but trust me – turn it on. Here’s the real equation… American employees = higher cost = larger wage base = inflation balanced by higher wages = good. What happened to us in the seventies is that we had high inflation coupled with high unemployment. That’s bad. That’s REALLY bad, and that’s one of the primary reasons that we put Reagan in office. There’s a lot of credit that’s given to Reagan for reigning inflation in. He didn’t really. What he did was to kick the outsourcing of American labor into high gear, thereby lowering the cost of goods and reducing inflation. The reason that I asked you to turn your bullshit detector on is because I want you to run this sentence through it… we cannot have the standard of living that we used to enjoy in the US and low inflation. It doesn’t work. And by standard of living here, folks, I ain’t talking about goodies. Okay? I’m not talking about how your daughter has an Ipod to match any color in her wardrobe. I’m talking about less unemployment. I’m talking about less homeless people. I’m talking about more money in our public coffers to help addicts and the mentally ill. I’m talking about quality of life, not material possessions. I think that one of the most important lessons that Jesus tried to hand down to us in the gospels is that material possessions do not make one happy.
Speaking of Jesus, I’d like to take a second here to address my fellow Christians about another benefit of bringing our jobs back from overseas.
If Bill Gates said “I’m going to open an American plant to manufacture my software. I’m going to staff that plant with twelve-year-olds, make them work twelve hours per day for a dollar an hour, six days per week,” what would our response be? “You go, Bill, because that’s capitalism, and that’s what America is all about”? I think not. I think that we would run Mr. Gates out of town on a rail. But every time that we buy goods made overseas, we make that contract. What would Jesus do, you think?
Democracy and capitalism are only compatible when the capitalism is controlled by the democracy… not the other way around.
Peace.
Randal
Thursday, November 6, 2008
What Now?
All right.
We did it.
We got Barack Obama elected president.
Now what?
Well, the first thing is addressed to my democrat brothers and sisters. You must not… MUST NOT… behave like the republicans did when they had all they toys. Unless you want to find yourselves exiled like you did in 1996 and 2000, and like the republicans are now, you MUST remember who you are. Remember who our president is. A perfect example of how NOT to behave is the partisan rant that Nancy Pelosi delivered after the first financial rescue package failed. You also must not allow yourself to become corrupted. I know – it’s difficult. Do you imagine that so many republicans have fallen to corruption because they’re bad people? I remind you that the rain falls on the just and the unjust alike. In other words, they aren’t bad people – they simply were tempted and surrendered to the temptation. I hate to break it to you, democrats, but YOU’RE the ones who are going to be tempted now because you’re the ones with the power to do stuff. Do not give into it.
Another thing that we can do is to END the federal contract with Diebold. Also use whatever leverage you have in other states to get them to end THEIR contracts with Diebold. We don’t need voting computers. We can keep the ballot tabulators, because as long as we continue to print ballots with the candidates and propositions arranged in different orders on each ballot, these cannot be corrupted. And for voters with disabilities, who cannot use a paper ballot? Maybe contract with another company… a company that will actually allow the congress to look inside their machines, understand how they work, and play with them to make another voting computer to be used ONLY by people with disabilities. I mean, in theory, voting computers are a great idea, but oversight on them has to be STRICT. Not non-existent like it was with Diebold. And if they try to claim that their work has to remain “secret” from the congress like Diebold did, then no contract. Escort them from the building.
Which reminds me – can we, while you guys have power, eliminate the electoral college? It served a purpose once upon a time, when it was impossible to count every single vote by hand in a timely fashion. It is now possible to do that. You don’t continue to use training wheels on a bike once you’ve learned to ride. Let’s take those training wheels off.
Hopefully this goes without saying, but let’s also either severely modify or eliminate the USA PATRIOT act. This thing is an unconstitutional mess with too little oversight and too much of a possibility of abuse.
I think that president-elect Obama is already planning this for his staff and cabinet, but invite the republicans to play with the toys, too, okay? Again, think of how it felt for you when the republicans were destroying everything that you tried to build. And when you think of that, instead of giving in to the baser urge for revenge, try to be the better person, okay? Maybe while they are (as Ari Fleisher put it) in the wilderness, we can encourage them to be a kinder, gentler party. Oh, and republicans? It might help matters somewhat if you try to broaden your base a little. The snake-handlers, rednecks and robber barons that you have narrowed your base to over the last couple of decades no longer serves you. This might also discourage you from trying to nominate Sarah Palin for president in 2012. Frankly, I think that if you try that, she’ll get her ass handed to her by president Obama anyway.
Hand in hand with that, I think, is to change the discourse in American politics. When the republicans go all Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter on you, remain calm and continue intelligent discourse. I am reminded of Whoopi Goldberg’s much too short lived talk show. One time she had the founder of WAR (the White Aryan Movement) on her show. She said that she knew that if he started to rant and rave the only way that she could keep any kind of dialogue going was by remaining calm. Don’t question their patriotism. Don’t call them names. Stay cool.
Work with the republicans to get civil recognition for homosexuals and stem cell research going. Having you guys in charge will encourage the moderate republicans to come out of the shell that Bush and his cronies have forced them into.
The last thing that I can think of for tonight is a biggie. IMPEACH BUSH AND CHENEY. Or at least try. I kind of suspect that you guys were hoping for a super-majority so that you could do this, but you didn’t get it. Frankly, I’m kind of glad that you didn’t. But try anyway. But make it clear if you do that it isn’t the kind of partisan witch hunt that they pulled on Clinton, but only an attempt to make these men pay for the crimes that they’ve committed. Yes, Hillary Clinton, that will make Nancy Pelosi the first female president for however long from the end of the impeachment process until president Obama is sworn in on the twentieth of January. Deal with it.
Okay, that’s all that I can think of for tonight, except for maybe the most important one. Do your best, while you have power, to bring something to America that we haven’t had in a long while, in the world and between the parties. And that is…
…peace.
Randal
We did it.
We got Barack Obama elected president.
Now what?
Well, the first thing is addressed to my democrat brothers and sisters. You must not… MUST NOT… behave like the republicans did when they had all they toys. Unless you want to find yourselves exiled like you did in 1996 and 2000, and like the republicans are now, you MUST remember who you are. Remember who our president is. A perfect example of how NOT to behave is the partisan rant that Nancy Pelosi delivered after the first financial rescue package failed. You also must not allow yourself to become corrupted. I know – it’s difficult. Do you imagine that so many republicans have fallen to corruption because they’re bad people? I remind you that the rain falls on the just and the unjust alike. In other words, they aren’t bad people – they simply were tempted and surrendered to the temptation. I hate to break it to you, democrats, but YOU’RE the ones who are going to be tempted now because you’re the ones with the power to do stuff. Do not give into it.
Another thing that we can do is to END the federal contract with Diebold. Also use whatever leverage you have in other states to get them to end THEIR contracts with Diebold. We don’t need voting computers. We can keep the ballot tabulators, because as long as we continue to print ballots with the candidates and propositions arranged in different orders on each ballot, these cannot be corrupted. And for voters with disabilities, who cannot use a paper ballot? Maybe contract with another company… a company that will actually allow the congress to look inside their machines, understand how they work, and play with them to make another voting computer to be used ONLY by people with disabilities. I mean, in theory, voting computers are a great idea, but oversight on them has to be STRICT. Not non-existent like it was with Diebold. And if they try to claim that their work has to remain “secret” from the congress like Diebold did, then no contract. Escort them from the building.
Which reminds me – can we, while you guys have power, eliminate the electoral college? It served a purpose once upon a time, when it was impossible to count every single vote by hand in a timely fashion. It is now possible to do that. You don’t continue to use training wheels on a bike once you’ve learned to ride. Let’s take those training wheels off.
Hopefully this goes without saying, but let’s also either severely modify or eliminate the USA PATRIOT act. This thing is an unconstitutional mess with too little oversight and too much of a possibility of abuse.
I think that president-elect Obama is already planning this for his staff and cabinet, but invite the republicans to play with the toys, too, okay? Again, think of how it felt for you when the republicans were destroying everything that you tried to build. And when you think of that, instead of giving in to the baser urge for revenge, try to be the better person, okay? Maybe while they are (as Ari Fleisher put it) in the wilderness, we can encourage them to be a kinder, gentler party. Oh, and republicans? It might help matters somewhat if you try to broaden your base a little. The snake-handlers, rednecks and robber barons that you have narrowed your base to over the last couple of decades no longer serves you. This might also discourage you from trying to nominate Sarah Palin for president in 2012. Frankly, I think that if you try that, she’ll get her ass handed to her by president Obama anyway.
Hand in hand with that, I think, is to change the discourse in American politics. When the republicans go all Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter on you, remain calm and continue intelligent discourse. I am reminded of Whoopi Goldberg’s much too short lived talk show. One time she had the founder of WAR (the White Aryan Movement) on her show. She said that she knew that if he started to rant and rave the only way that she could keep any kind of dialogue going was by remaining calm. Don’t question their patriotism. Don’t call them names. Stay cool.
Work with the republicans to get civil recognition for homosexuals and stem cell research going. Having you guys in charge will encourage the moderate republicans to come out of the shell that Bush and his cronies have forced them into.
The last thing that I can think of for tonight is a biggie. IMPEACH BUSH AND CHENEY. Or at least try. I kind of suspect that you guys were hoping for a super-majority so that you could do this, but you didn’t get it. Frankly, I’m kind of glad that you didn’t. But try anyway. But make it clear if you do that it isn’t the kind of partisan witch hunt that they pulled on Clinton, but only an attempt to make these men pay for the crimes that they’ve committed. Yes, Hillary Clinton, that will make Nancy Pelosi the first female president for however long from the end of the impeachment process until president Obama is sworn in on the twentieth of January. Deal with it.
Okay, that’s all that I can think of for tonight, except for maybe the most important one. Do your best, while you have power, to bring something to America that we haven’t had in a long while, in the world and between the parties. And that is…
…peace.
Randal
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
All That I Can Think To Say Tonight...
It looks like America's long night... and long nightmare... is over. Thank God.
Peace.
Randal
Peace.
Randal
Monday, November 3, 2008
Isn't It Funny
Some final thoughts before election day…
Isn’t it funny that when our democratic governor in Washington said that our economy was strong it was cause for republican ridicule, but when John McCain said it on a national level, we simply misunderstood what he said.
Isn’t it funny that when we have a candidate who wants to give our money to rich people, the republicans call it “capitalism”, but when we have a candidate who wants to get some of that money BACK for us, the republicans call it “socialism”.
Isn’t it funny that when the republicans give WalMart an advantage over other businesses, they call it “economic stimulus” and it’s good… but when we give a member of a minority race an advantage to help them get caught up, they call it “affirmative action” and it’s bad.
Isn’t it funny that when billions of dollars are given to corporations for absolutely nothing, they call it “the free market” and it’s good, but when we give $1000 per month to a single mother to feed and clothe her kids, they call it “welfare” and it’s bad.
Okay, guys… we have the chance to get America back to where we were before the terror and the constant, exhausting fear, and back to the hope, energy and success that used to define America. And if you vote for McCain or don’t vote, then don’t come whining to me in four years when we find ourselves in the same mess that we’re in today or worse.
Vote Obama.
Peace.
Randal
Isn’t it funny that when our democratic governor in Washington said that our economy was strong it was cause for republican ridicule, but when John McCain said it on a national level, we simply misunderstood what he said.
Isn’t it funny that when we have a candidate who wants to give our money to rich people, the republicans call it “capitalism”, but when we have a candidate who wants to get some of that money BACK for us, the republicans call it “socialism”.
Isn’t it funny that when the republicans give WalMart an advantage over other businesses, they call it “economic stimulus” and it’s good… but when we give a member of a minority race an advantage to help them get caught up, they call it “affirmative action” and it’s bad.
Isn’t it funny that when billions of dollars are given to corporations for absolutely nothing, they call it “the free market” and it’s good, but when we give $1000 per month to a single mother to feed and clothe her kids, they call it “welfare” and it’s bad.
Okay, guys… we have the chance to get America back to where we were before the terror and the constant, exhausting fear, and back to the hope, energy and success that used to define America. And if you vote for McCain or don’t vote, then don’t come whining to me in four years when we find ourselves in the same mess that we’re in today or worse.
Vote Obama.
Peace.
Randal
Saturday, November 1, 2008
Single-Issue Voters
Politics has been a major topic of conversation in the break room over these last few months, and I’m very happy of that. It’s said that you can never, in company, talk about sex, politics or religion. Personally, I think that once you’ve eliminated those three topics of conversation, pretty much all that you’re left with is the weather. And I HATE talking about the weather.
So anyway, I overheard one guy in the breakroom say that he had voted for Bush in 2004 simply because of Bush’s simple-minded views on abortion and evolution. When I heard that, I think that I figured out a big part of our democracy’s woes right now. Single-issue voters. This guy was willing to perpetuate the most unconstitutional, undemocratic presidency of all times, simply because the “president” in question believed that God literally created the world in six days and promised to do everything that he could to overturn a woman’s right to have a safe and clean abortion.
Look, I don’t expect anyone to agree fully with everything that a presidential candidate says, ever. I, myself am a little troubled that Barack Obama won’t come right out and clarify his views on gun control. I do, however, agree with most of what the man says, therefore I’ll vote for him.
So that got me thinking about these single issues, what they are, and how they might be resolved. So let’s start with the first one that I mentioned here.
1) Abortion. I honestly don’t believe that a woman’s right to a safe and clean abortion will end under any president in the foreseeable future. I think that the narrow-minded idealogues who want that had their chance under GWB and didn’t get it. He tried, but it didn’t happen. I, for one, would love to see the court revisit Roe Vs. Wade and address some issues in it that weren’t addressed the first time around, such as the FATHER’S rights when a woman wants an abortion. We keep insisting that men have a greater role in the lives of their children, while denying them this vital role. The woman didn’t make the baby alone, and you can bet that if she has it, she’s coming after the father for support, so he really should be a participant in the decision whether or not to terminate. But I digress. Yes, this is an important issue. No, it is not the only issue upon which to cast your vote. If you’re pro-choice and the pro-choice candidate doesn’t want to do anything about the pathetic state of American health care, do you vote for him or her anyway? And what if you’re anti-choice, and your candidate wants to continue rewarding corporations for outsourcing American jobs?
2) Religion. Oh, holy God! Religion! As a Christian, I gotta tell you that this is the BRICK-DUMBEST reason to vote for a candidate. As I stated when I wrote about the acceptance speeches at the conventions, I wish that politicians would quit attaching God’s name to every piece of crap pet peeve and dragging it through the mud. Guys, the first amendment prohibits Congress from interfering with or being influenced by religion when it comes to pass laws. The Constitution prohibits ANY religious test from being required for elected office. Also, you really can’t be sure if what a politician says in public is the same thing that he practices in private. Abe Lincoln said something that most modern politicians would do well to remember… that it is less important that we believe that God is on our side than it is for us to endeavor to be on God’s side. I think that the last president that we had who truly understood the role of religion in a president’s policies was Jimmy Carter. Carter, a southern Baptist, found both abortion and the death penalty to be in conflict with his personal religious views, but bowed to the will of the American people in both instances. And I think that the last president that we had who, blowjob notwithstanding, truly understood Christianity was Bill Clinton. When a woman asked him if he was “born-again”, he said “Ma’am, only God gets to make that decision.” Mr. Bush, on the other hand, talks ceaselessly about what a good Christian he is, while disregarding the poor and leading our country into an unprovoked and unjustifiable invasion and war.
3) Guns. No president CAN OR WILL take away your guns. Ever. It would take an act of Congress to overturn the second amendment and it WILL NOT HAPPEN. EVER! The second amendment places the possibility of regulation on firearms in America and some presidents (like Bill Clinton and the assault rifle ban) act to institute new regulation. THAT’S IT. It both tickles and distresses me that the candidates who talk most boldly about state’s rights say that states have no rights to control the firearms of their citizens. I remind you that in the so-called “wild west”, TOWNS were allowed to regulate their citizen’s firearms.
4) Small government. Every president from Jefferson through GWB that has run on a platform of small government has acted to increase the size and power of the federal government exponentially. Whereas President Clinton, who didn’t make this a campaign issue, reduced the size of the federal government considerably. Given that information, I would say that if you are TRULY interested in smaller government, then vote for the candidate who doesn’t make it one of the planks of their platform.
I guess that what I’m saying here, folks, is to take ALL of a candidate’s views into account when voting. Don’t just pick one issue and ride it to death.
Peace.
Randal
So anyway, I overheard one guy in the breakroom say that he had voted for Bush in 2004 simply because of Bush’s simple-minded views on abortion and evolution. When I heard that, I think that I figured out a big part of our democracy’s woes right now. Single-issue voters. This guy was willing to perpetuate the most unconstitutional, undemocratic presidency of all times, simply because the “president” in question believed that God literally created the world in six days and promised to do everything that he could to overturn a woman’s right to have a safe and clean abortion.
Look, I don’t expect anyone to agree fully with everything that a presidential candidate says, ever. I, myself am a little troubled that Barack Obama won’t come right out and clarify his views on gun control. I do, however, agree with most of what the man says, therefore I’ll vote for him.
So that got me thinking about these single issues, what they are, and how they might be resolved. So let’s start with the first one that I mentioned here.
1) Abortion. I honestly don’t believe that a woman’s right to a safe and clean abortion will end under any president in the foreseeable future. I think that the narrow-minded idealogues who want that had their chance under GWB and didn’t get it. He tried, but it didn’t happen. I, for one, would love to see the court revisit Roe Vs. Wade and address some issues in it that weren’t addressed the first time around, such as the FATHER’S rights when a woman wants an abortion. We keep insisting that men have a greater role in the lives of their children, while denying them this vital role. The woman didn’t make the baby alone, and you can bet that if she has it, she’s coming after the father for support, so he really should be a participant in the decision whether or not to terminate. But I digress. Yes, this is an important issue. No, it is not the only issue upon which to cast your vote. If you’re pro-choice and the pro-choice candidate doesn’t want to do anything about the pathetic state of American health care, do you vote for him or her anyway? And what if you’re anti-choice, and your candidate wants to continue rewarding corporations for outsourcing American jobs?
2) Religion. Oh, holy God! Religion! As a Christian, I gotta tell you that this is the BRICK-DUMBEST reason to vote for a candidate. As I stated when I wrote about the acceptance speeches at the conventions, I wish that politicians would quit attaching God’s name to every piece of crap pet peeve and dragging it through the mud. Guys, the first amendment prohibits Congress from interfering with or being influenced by religion when it comes to pass laws. The Constitution prohibits ANY religious test from being required for elected office. Also, you really can’t be sure if what a politician says in public is the same thing that he practices in private. Abe Lincoln said something that most modern politicians would do well to remember… that it is less important that we believe that God is on our side than it is for us to endeavor to be on God’s side. I think that the last president that we had who truly understood the role of religion in a president’s policies was Jimmy Carter. Carter, a southern Baptist, found both abortion and the death penalty to be in conflict with his personal religious views, but bowed to the will of the American people in both instances. And I think that the last president that we had who, blowjob notwithstanding, truly understood Christianity was Bill Clinton. When a woman asked him if he was “born-again”, he said “Ma’am, only God gets to make that decision.” Mr. Bush, on the other hand, talks ceaselessly about what a good Christian he is, while disregarding the poor and leading our country into an unprovoked and unjustifiable invasion and war.
3) Guns. No president CAN OR WILL take away your guns. Ever. It would take an act of Congress to overturn the second amendment and it WILL NOT HAPPEN. EVER! The second amendment places the possibility of regulation on firearms in America and some presidents (like Bill Clinton and the assault rifle ban) act to institute new regulation. THAT’S IT. It both tickles and distresses me that the candidates who talk most boldly about state’s rights say that states have no rights to control the firearms of their citizens. I remind you that in the so-called “wild west”, TOWNS were allowed to regulate their citizen’s firearms.
4) Small government. Every president from Jefferson through GWB that has run on a platform of small government has acted to increase the size and power of the federal government exponentially. Whereas President Clinton, who didn’t make this a campaign issue, reduced the size of the federal government considerably. Given that information, I would say that if you are TRULY interested in smaller government, then vote for the candidate who doesn’t make it one of the planks of their platform.
I guess that what I’m saying here, folks, is to take ALL of a candidate’s views into account when voting. Don’t just pick one issue and ride it to death.
Peace.
Randal
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)