Iranian Election and E-mail

First off, just a couple of quick thoughts on the kerfuffle over the Iranian elections.

What are the chances that we are behind the protests? I don’t have any evidence that we are, but let’s face it – you look at the number of times that America has been involved in “protests” over legitimate elections that wind up putting an illegitimate leader in place… Iran in 1941, Cuba in 1958, Florida in 2000… we’re not above engineering elections to get what we consider in our own near-sighted myopic way to be a favorable outcome. Of course, the results of the three aforementioned elections (the Shah of Iran, Fidel Castro and George W. Bush) show that what is favorable in the short-term is not always a good thing in the long-term.

Okay, now on to the e-mail. I’ve said before (and I’m apparently doomed to say again) that if you forward a brainless e-mail to me, I will pick it apart with a crab fork. So…

A friend of mine whom I consider a “borderline neo-con”, meaning that he really WANTS to be a neo-con when he grows up but can’t quite bring himself to fully handle the snakes and drink the Kool-aid sent this e-mail to me call the Bill of “non-rights”. Let me make absolutely clear that this is separate from the “bill of responsibilities” that the sane among us advocate to get Americans to grow up. So let’s look at each of these “non-rights”.

You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.

Good start. I like it. This idea of entitlement is part of what’s gotten us into the financial mess that we’re in right now. It’s like when I see these TV commercials talking about how this or that outfit can help you stop your credit card debt. Want to stop your credit card debt? CUT UP THE BLOODY CREDIT CARDS! Get rid of them! With the possible exception of a house or a car, go back to living the way that people used to: if you can’t afford to pay cash for it, you CAN’T AFFORD IT! So let’s look at the next one.

You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc. but the world is full of dummies and probably always will be.

I agree. I’ve seen this phrased different ways at different times and I always agree with it. This idea that somehow the way that I think that YOU should live is the correct way always confuses and bugs me. For instance, on Bill Maher’s show a few weeks back, he had a former republican lawmaker named Heather Wilson. With only seconds remaining in the show before he started his final segment, New Rules, he inexplicably asked Ms. Wilson about gay marriage. She put on that holier-than-thou, simpering face that I’ve grown so sick of and said the words that always presage trouble for free thinkers “Well, I’m a Christian…” I gotta tell you, Ms. Wilson, that… AS A CHRISTIAN… not all of us agree with what you’re about to whine. As a matter of fact, some of us take Jesus’ admonition not to judge to heart. At any rate, she continued that with “I was raised to believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman.” Bully for you. What gives you the right to impose that belief on others? Ms. Wilson, on the off-chance that you’re reading this, I challenge you to a debate on the Biblical view of marriage and it’s application or non-application today, and I can almost guarantee you that if we have impartial judges, you’ll lose. But in the meantime, all that the fact that you think that marriage should be between a man and a woman means is that YOU should marry a MAN if you haven’t already. It doesn’t mean that you get to decide who I marry. On to the next one…

You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found and will gladly help anyone in need. But we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.

Here’s where this e-mail starts to fall apart for me. I have to ask… why not? Our founding fathers spoke glowingly of our right to the pursuit of happiness in the Declaration of Independence. How on Earth can you pursue happiness if you are hungry and living in a cardboard box? I see absolutely no reason or justification, aside from greed, why every American shouldn’t be guaranteed basic shelter and sustenance. I’m not talking about caviar and a mansion. I’m talking about a studio apartment and bread, milk and beans. You want to kill two birds with one stones? Hire the unemployed in cities to renovate buildings for these “professional couch potatoes” and then to maintain and manage them. Use failing small family farms in America to provide the bread, milk and beans for these folks.

I also take exception to the idea that Americans are the most charitable people to be found. Beg pardon? Statistically, on a private basis, Americans give the LEAST to charity of any industrialized nation. Heck, MUSLIM countries give more in charity than we do. A conservative friend of mine a while back commented when we discussing the idea of a flat sales tax in place of the income tax that closing the deduction for charitable contributions would be a DIS-INCENTIVE for people to donate! WHAT? I THOUGHT THAT WE WERE THE MOST CHARITABLE PEOPLE TO BE FOUND! No, my friend… we are the most “what’s in it for me” people to be found. And the next?

You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care.

Again, why not? We are the only industrialized nation that allows corporations to profit off of the pain and suffering of others and we need to quit it.

You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don't be surprised
if the rest of us want to see you get the blue juice.

Um… excuse me… but if by “blue juice” you mean lethal injection, then aren’t you physically harming that person? I mean, shouldn’t this apply to our government as well as us? A little later in this e-mail, the author espouses the mistaken but oft-repeated idea that America was founded to be a Christian country. Wasn’t Christ clear enough about the taking of life? Christ said that if someone strikes your left cheek, turn your right to them also. He said to love and forgive your enemies. Not put them to death. But it’s much harder to do that than to simply be a hypocrite, yeah? And the next…

You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.

True. And wittily phrased.

You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.

Again, why the heck not? And also, awkwardly phrased. As an amateur compositionist, I give it a C-. Why shouldn’t every American be guaranteed the right to some sort of employment? Even if it’s something simple and non-corporate. In downtown Seattle, whenever I see someone shining shoes or playing an instrument or singing, or just generally doing something creative or entertaining when their hat out, I try to drop them a buck or two. I think that this should be changed to “You have the right to employment, but do not necessarily have the right to receive this employment from someone else. You may have to go out and create it on your own.” Next:

You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.

I freely admit to being too dumb to understand this one altogether. Wasn’t the author rejoicing over our laws in previous passages? Oh, wait… maybe he’s referring to those of us who are “confused” by second amendment, and insist on taking it literally where it says a “WELL-REGULATED militia being necessary, the rights of the people to bear arms should not be infringed.” Just a guess, but when one of these nutjobs starts ranting about the bill of rights, they are very rarely talking about editorial freedom or freedom of religion or speech, which they couldn’t really give a crap about, but the right to bear arms. Now for one that I agree with, although it has nothing to do with rights.

This is an English speaking country. We don't care where you came from . . . English is our language. Learn it!

I can never express clearly enough to my liberal friends how important this is to a peaceful nation. A former girlfriend of mine once actually commented that it was incumbent upon retail clerks to learn the language of their customers instead of upon the customers to learn English. In one day I may have native speakers of Chinese, Japanese, Spanish, Russian, Tagalong and Swahili. Seems like a hell of an education necessary for selling a TV to a customer. All that I can say is that if I moved to a non-English speaking country, I would learn the language of the land FOR MY OWN CONVENIENCE. In my home and in my neighborhood (presumably called “America Town” or “Little America”) I would speak English. If I left my little cocoon, I would speak the native language just to make my life easier.

By the same token, I would like to share something that happened to me years ago as a cashier. As I was wrapping up with customer A, I greeted customer B, whom I then realized was speaking in Russian on his cell phone. Customer A, in a kind of snide, superior tone of voice sniped “Probably doesn’t speak English.” After this jerk left, and customer B ended his cell phone call so that he and I could transact (something that most ENGLISH-SPEAKING AMERICANS don’t have the courtesy to do, I might add), his wife told him in English what the jerk had said. The Russian dude looked after the other customer and said IN PERFECTLY CLEAR ENGLISH “I speak seven languages. I wonder how many HE speaks?” It turns out that the man, a Russian immigrant, was on the phone to Russia making funeral arrangements for his mom. To put it another way, here’s a joke that I heard from an emergency-room orderly one time. I forget where he was from… I do remember that he speaks four languages. What do you call someone who speaks three languages? Tri-lingual. What do you call someone who speaks two languages? Bi-lingual. What do you call someone who speaks ONE language? American. So even though I agree that people who immigrate to this country should learn the language, I also think that we need to get off of our high horses about this somewhat until we start making more of an effort to learn other languages ourselves. And finally…

You do not have the right to change our country's history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history. Sorry if you are uncomfortable with it.

(Whispering) Uh… dude? By insisting that America was founded on the belief in one true God… presumably you mean THE one true God as Christians and Jews refer to “him” and not Allah or the Buddha Dharma or any of the other “one true God’s” out there… you are changing our country’s history AND heritage.

Look at the documents, people. Our country was founded on FREEDOMS bounded by LAWS. The founders, very few of whom are what F-word news would consider “Christian”, never mentioned the “one true God” in the documents for a good reason. The closest that they come is to say “creator”, which is a logical statement rather than a religious one. If we are here then we were, by the laws of logic, created. Whatever is created has a creator. They do not speculate as to what that force may have been.

Also, “in God we trust” has only been a part of our “history and heritage” for a relatively short time. It was not around at the time of the creators. It really came into being after the civil war as an attempt to give the north and south something to pull together around since they had been so recently pulled apart.

In a related note, “so help me God” as part of the presidential oath of office is what we call a TRADITION. It is not written into the oath, nor should it be. Granted, it is a long and venerable tradition, having been started by George Washington at the first inaugural and carried forward by every president every since. But it is still a TRADITION. If our next president chooses not to say it, he or she will get crap from the media and their peers, but they will still be receiving the oath AS WRITTEN.

And, although this “controversy” seems to have died down some, “one nation, under God” was only added to the flag oath in the fifties. It was originally “one nation, indivisible”. And for those who think that the flag oath can’t be changed, I’ll ask you to watch a film of kids taking the oath prior to about 1940. The tradition at that time was to hold your hand over your heart while you said “I pledge allegiance”, and then to thrust your arm out rigid at a forty-five degree angle, fingers pointing toward the flag as you finished the oath. For some reason, after the rise of Hitler in Germany, this practice was stopped. Hmmm… I wonder why?



I ask again, folks. Think about these things and research them before you forward them. To quote the eminent sage George Carlin, “It’s all bullshit and it’s all bad for ya.”

PS - I signed up for Google ads as way to try to make some extra money... you will see them appear to the left of this column. I would like to issue the disclaimer that I have no control over the ads placed there, they are based on keywords from my posts. As a matter of fact, sometimes, like when they are ads for "vote pro-life merchandise for sale", i find them to be utterly repulsive.

Peace.

Randal